Legal Research
Cases
Turner v Dinsdale

Turner v Dinsdale

Case [2023] WADC 153 21 December 2023

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

LOCATION:   PERTH
CITATION:   TURNER -v- DINSDALE [2023] WADC 153
CORAM:   MIOCEVICH DCJ
HEARD:   17 JUNE 2022
DELIVERED          :   21 DECEMBER 2023
FILE NO/S:   APP 79 of 2021
MATTER: IN THE MATTER of Part 7 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003
BETWEEN:   JAKE LEE TURNER
Appellant
AND
HARLEE DINSDALE
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   R A CAPARARO
File Number            :   CIC 151/2020

Catchwords:

Criminal injuries compensation - Appeal - Assessor found appellant disentitled to compensation by arming himself with a baseball bat - Offences of going armed in public and possession of a weapon - Lawful authority to possess a baseball bat - Defence of duress - Lawful authority to arm oneself pursuant to s 244 and s 254 Criminal Code

Legislation:

Criminal Code Act Compilation Act 1913 (WA), s 1, s 31, s 32, s 36, s 64, s 68, s 244, s 248, s 254, s 445
Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (WA), s 3, s 6, s 12, s 39, s 41, s 55, s 56
Weapons Act 1999 (WA), s 4, s 8, s 9, s 25, s 31

Result:

Appeal allowed
Compensation award $75,000

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	Mr V G Kurup
Respondent	:	No appearance
Amicus Curiae	:	Mr Z R Clifford appeared on behalf of the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Justice

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	CLP Legal Pty Ltd
Respondent	:	Not applicable
Amicus Curiae	:	State Solicitor for Western Australia

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Hall v Collins [2003] WASCA 74
Kittelty v Davies [2011] WADC 1
Kunakool v Boys (1987) 77 ALR 435
Lau v The State of Western Australia [2017] WASCA 16
Mackinlay v Wiley [1971] WAR 3
Marchesano v The State of Western Australia [2017] WASCA 177
MDC v BLR [2015] WADC 107
Morgan v Cramer [2019] WASC 68
Phillips v Mettam [2022] WADC 49
Re Puterangi [2017] WADC 168
Savic v Duric [2021] WADC 53
Underwood v Underwood [2018] WADC 13

MIOCEVICH DCJ:

This is an appeal against an assessor refusing an application for criminal injuries compensation.
The respondent was convicted after trial of committing an offence of doing an act as a result of which bodily harm was caused to the appellant.
The assessor found the appellant had committed an offence of going armed in public, by arming himself with a baseball bat prior to being shot by the respondent. The appellant was therefore found to be disentitled to compensation.
The appellant argues he was not committing an offence as he was acting in self defence and is therefore entitled to compensation.
This is a hearing de novo. For reasons that follow, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities the appellant was not committing an offence and is entitled to compensation.

History of application

An application for compensation was made pursuant to s 12 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (WA) (CICA), on the…

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 Turner v Dinsdale

Details

AGLC: Turner v Dinsdale [2023] WADC 153
Case: [2023] WADC 153
Decision Date: 21 DECEMBER 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Turner v Dinsdale, the appellant sought to challenge the decision of an assessor who ruled that he was not eligible for criminal injuries compensation because he had armed himself with a baseball bat. The appellant was charged with offences related to going armed in public and possessing a weapon. The appeal centred on whether the appellant had lawful authority to possess the baseball bat and whether he could have lawfully armed himself with it, as well as whether the defence of duress could be considered in this context.

The court had to determine whether the appellant's possession and use of the baseball bat fell under the category of lawful authority as per sections 244 and 254 of the Criminal Code. It also needed to assess whether the defence of duress could apply in the context of the appellant arming himself with the bat. The court examined the circumstances under which the appellant claimed to have acted under duress and whether this could provide a lawful basis for possessing and using the bat.

The court found that the appellant did not have lawful authority to possess or arm himself with the baseball bat as there was no evidence to support the claim of duress. The appellant's actions were self-initiated and not compelled by immediate threat or coercion. The court concluded that the appellant's possession and use of the bat did not fall within the exceptions provided by the Criminal Code and that the defence of duress was not applicable in this scenario. Consequently, the decision of the assessor was upheld, and the appellant's claim for criminal injuries compensation was dismissed.

The court's final order was to affirm the decision of the assessor, rejecting the appellant's claim for criminal injuries compensation. The appellant was not entitled to compensation as he had armed himself with a baseball bat, which was not considered lawful under the circumstances.

Orders