T v Oliver - [2002] QDC 351

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

T v Oliver [2002] QDC 351

PARTIES:

T
Applicant

v

Wayne John Oliver
Respondent

FILE NO/S:

3772 of 2002

DIVISION:

Civil jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

10 December 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

28 November 2002

JUDGE:

Forde DCJ

ORDER:

1. That the Respondent do pay the Applicant the sum of $26,250.00 compensation.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW- CRIMINAL COMPENSATION- SEXUAL ASSAULT- POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER – MENTAL & NERVOUS SHOCK- 1A CRIMINAL OFFENCE VICTIMS REGULATION- ACUTE STRESS DISORDER- SEXUAL OFFENCE

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 ss.19,20,24,25(7) Regulation 1A
SAM v. SAM [2001] QCA 12
JI v AV [2001] QCA 510
HV v LN [2000] QCA 472
R v Tiltman ex parte Dawe, SC No.324 of 1995
R v Kazakoff ex parte Ferguson (2001) 2 Qd R 320
R v M District Court 5312 of 2001
M v. M District Court 5315 of 2001
Wotton v. Pickles District Court Townsville 67 of 2002
HW v LO [2000] QCA 377

COUNSEL:

Mr A.J. Kimmins for the Applicant

No appearance for the Respondent

SOLICITORS:

Tony Bailey Solicitor for the Applicant

The Applicant, T, applies under section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (the “Act”), for compensation as a result of injuries sustained as a result of the offence of unlawful and indecent assault for which the Respondent Wayne John Oliver was convicted upon indictment on 12 March 2002 at Gladstone. The offence occurred on 26 September 2001.

The Respondent was sentenced on the factual basis that he put his hand over the Applicant’s mouth, kissed her and touched her breasts and then thrust his pelvis into her pelvic region. The Applicant was 16 years of age at the time of the offence and the Respondent was 26 years of age. The Respondent was ordered to serve three (3) months imprisonment for the said offence.

History of the Applicant

The Applicant started running away from home when she was 14. Her father died when she was quite young, and she did not have a good relationship with her mother. She eventually left home at the age of 16 years. The Applicant accepts that she did have problems prior to the said offence. She affirms that the matters she told the psychologist, Mr. Ryan are true and correct. She stated that her symptoms worsened after the said offence. She started to drink more alcohol and she has self harmed. She was admitted overnight to the Gladstone Hospital in December 2001 for treatment for self inflicted injuries. The Applicant had feelings of guilt and shame after the incident. Some of her friends blamed her for the incident. She began to suffer flashbacks of the incident.

Report of Mr. Ryan, psychologist.

Mr. Ryan interviewed the Applicant on 12 June 2002, some fifteen (15) months after the said offence. He confirmed with her that she had suffered no physical injuries which were visible. She told Mr. Ryan that her mother and her mother’s de…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading T v Oliver

Details

AGLC: T v Oliver [2002] QDC 351
Case: [2002] QDC 351
Decision Date: 10 December 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of T v Oliver was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The applicant, T, sought compensation from the respondent, Oliver, who was convicted of sexual assault. The dispute centred around the compensation T was entitled to receive under the Criminal Compensation Act for the trauma and psychological harm suffered as a result of the offence. The applicant contended that she had developed post-traumatic stress disorder and acute stress disorder following the assault, and sought compensation under the Act.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's psychological conditions qualified as compensable injuries under the Act. Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant's post-traumatic stress disorder and acute stress disorder were sufficiently severe to warrant compensation. The court also had to consider whether these conditions were a direct result of the sexual assault, and if the applicant's claims were substantiated by expert medical evidence.

The court found that the applicant had indeed suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and acute stress disorder as a result of the sexual assault. The applicant's claims were supported by expert psychiatric evidence, which established a causal link between the assault and the psychological conditions. The court determined that these conditions were severe enough to qualify as compensable injuries under the Act. Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $26,250.00 in compensation. The court's decision emphasised the importance of recognising and compensating the psychological impact of criminal offences on victims.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. That the Respondent do pay the Applicant the sum of $26,250.00 compensation.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	T v Oliver [2002] QDC 351
PARTIES:	T Applicant v Wayne John Oliver Respondent
FILE NO/S:	3772 of 2002
DIVISION:	Civil jurisdiction
PROCEEDING:	Application for criminal compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	10 December 2002
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	28 November 2002
JUDGE:	Forde DCJ
ORDER:	1. That the Respondent do pay the Applicant the sum of $26,250.00 compensation.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW- CRIMINAL COMPENSATION- SEXUAL ASSAULT- POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER – MENTAL & NERVOUS SHOCK- 1A CRIMINAL OFFENCE VICTIMS REGULATION- ACUTE STRESS DISORDER- SEXUAL OFFENCE Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 ss.19,20,24,25(7) Regulation 1A SAM v. SAM [2001] QCA 12 JI v AV [2001] QCA 510 HV v LN [2000] QCA 472 R v Tiltman ex parte Dawe, SC No.324 of 1995 R v Kazakoff ex parte Ferguson (2001) 2 Qd R 320 R v M District Court 5312 of 2001 M v. M District Court 5315 of 2001 Wotton v. Pickles District Court Townsville 67 of 2002 HW v LO [2000] QCA 377
COUNSEL:	Mr A.J. Kimmins for the Applicant No appearance for the Respondent
SOLICITORS:	Tony Bailey Solicitor for the Applicant