T v S

Case [2008] QDC 84


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: T v S [2008] QDC 84
PARTIES:

T
As litigation guardian for
T
  Applicant

v

S   Respondent

FILE NO: D22/08
PROCEEDING: Criminal Compensation Application
DELIVERED ON: 24th April 2008
DELIVERED AT: Beenleigh
HEARING DATE: 22nd April 2008
JUDGE: Everson DCJ
ORDER:

The respondent pay to the applicant as litigation guardian for the victim the sum of $55 500 by way of compensation.

That any amount paid to the victim pursuant to this order be paid to the Public Trustee of Queensland whose receipt for such sum shall be sufficient discharge.

That the Public Trustee of Queensland be appointed manager of and take possession of and control and manage the said sum on behalf of the victim in accordance with powers and duties defined in the Public Trustee Act 1978 during the minority of the victim.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL COMPENSATION- mental or nervous shock-adverse impact.

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995

R v Jones ex parte Zaicov [2002] 2 Qd R 303 at 310
R v Atwell ex parte Julie [2002] 2 Qd R 367 at 373
Vlug v Carrasco [2006] QCA 561 at [11]

COUNSEL
SOLICITORS: Ms Fadden for Legal Aid

This is an application for compensation pursuant to Section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”). It is brought by the mother of the victim as her litigation guardian.

The injuries giving rise to the application were suffered as a result of the offence for which the respondent was convicted on indictment on 17th March 2006, namely maintaining a sexual relationship with a child with a circumstance of aggravation between 1st January 2001 and 28th February 2005.

Facts
The victim was born on 28th October 1992. She was aged between 8 and 12 during the period particularised above.

The respondent was born on 30th December 1966 and was accordingly aged between 34 and 38 during the period nominated in the indictment. He was at this time the de facto husband of the victim’s mother. The victim was under his care and called him “Dad.”

The single count for which the respondent was convicted encompassed a series of particularised offences involving penile and anal rape as well as indecent treatment. The offending was regular and consistent throughout the entire period encapsulated by the charge. The ongoing sexual relationship involved sexual intercourse occurring at every available opportunity. It included the respondent requiring the victim to perform fellatio upon him and forcing her to swallow his semen. It also included the respondent requiring the victim to wear a G-string and insert vibrators into her vagina. He also took photographs of her in sexually explicit positions, naked, during and after sexual intercourse.[1] The unlawful sexual violence committed by the respondent against the victim resulted in her bleeding from her vagina on several occasions and sometimes her anus.[2]

[1] Affidavit of Debbie Richardson filed 3rd March 2008, Exhibit B.

[2] Ibid, Exhibit C.

Throughout this…

Continue reading T v S

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
T v S [2008] QDC 84
Case
[2008] QDC 84
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, acting as litigation guardian for the victim, sought compensation under the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for the mental and nervous shock experienced by the victim due to a criminal act committed by the respondent. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The victim, who was a minor, suffered psychological trauma after being subjected to a serious criminal act by the respondent, leading to a claim for compensation under the Act.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the victim could claim compensation for the adverse impact of the mental and nervous shock caused by the respondent's criminal act. The court needed to consider the provisions of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 and the extent to which the victim could claim compensation for such damages. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate amount of compensation and whether the Public Trustee of Queensland should manage the awarded compensation on behalf of the minor victim.

The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and relevant case law, including R v Jones ex parte Zaicov, R v Atwell ex parte Julie, and Vlug v Carrasco. The court found that the statutory scheme allows for compensation for the adverse impact of mental or nervous shock, and that the victim was entitled to claim such compensation. The court assessed the evidence regarding the severity of the victim's condition and the impact on their life, ultimately determining that the appropriate amount of compensation was $55,500. Given that the victim was a minor, the court appointed the Public Trustee of Queensland to manage the compensation on behalf of the victim until they reached the age of majority.

The court ordered that the respondent pay $55,500 to the applicant, as litigation guardian for the victim. Any payment made to the victim must be handed to the Public Trustee of Queensland, whose receipt will suffice as discharge. The Public Trustee of Queensland was appointed to manage the compensation on behalf of the victim during their minority, in accordance with the Public Trustee Act 1978.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay to the applicant as litigation guardian for the victim the sum of $55 500 by way of compensation.

That any amount paid to the victim pursuant to this order be paid to the Public Trustee of Queensland whose receipt for such sum shall be sufficient discharge.

That the Public Trustee of Queensland be appointed manager of and take possession of and control and manage the said sum on behalf of the victim in accordance with powers and duties defined in the Public Trustee Act 1978 during the minority of the victim.

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.