Victims Compensation Fund v Crowley

[2000] NSWCA 378

CITATION:	Victims Compensation Fund v Crowley [2000] NSWCA 378
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 40201/00
HEARING DATE(S):	18 July 2000
JUDGMENT DATE:	18 July 2000
PARTIES :	Victims Compensation Fund Corporation v Steven Crowley & Anor
JUDGMENT OF:	Meagher JA at 1; Stein JA at 7; Brownie AJA at 10

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION :	District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) :	422/99 at Newcastle
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :	Goldring DCJ

COUNSEL:	Claimant: R E Quickenden Opponent: D S Timmins
SOLICITORS:	Claimant: Victims Compensation Tribunal, Advocacy Services Opponent: Turnbull Hill
CATCHWORDS:	Victims Compensation Tribunal - appeal from - orders of District Court - Certiorari
LEGISLATION CITED:	Victims Compensation Act 1996, s39(1)
DECISION:	1. Summons for leave to appeal granted and orders 1 and 2 in Summons made, 1) Judgment delivered on 8.12.99 by Goldring DCJ in the District Court at Newcastle in proceedings 422/99 at Newcastle be removed to the Court of Appeal and quashed; 2) the record containing orders made on 8.12.99 by Goldring DCJ in proceedings 422/99 at Newcastle be removed to the Court of Appeal and quashed; 2. The claimant, Victims Compensation Fund Corporation to pay the costs of the first opponent, Steven Crowley.

- 4 -

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA: 40201/00

MEAGHER JA
STEIN JA
BROWNIE AJA

Tuesday, 18 July 2000

VICTIMS COMPENSATION FUND CORPORATION v STEVEN CROWLEY AND ANOTHER

JUDGMENT

1   MEAGHER JA: In this matter Mr Steven Crowley, the first opponent, was unfortunately bashed very severely in a public lavatory in a hotel in Newcastle, apparently on 26 February 1997. On 8 July 1997 he filed an application for compensation dated 29 May 1997. On 25 May 1998 that matter came before an assessor, who dismissed the application. On 12 August 1998 there was an appeal to the tribunal, constituted by the learned magistrate, Mr Gabb. At this stage it was clear enough what the nature of Mr Crowley's medical condition was. He suffered as a result of the violence to which he was subjected in the hotel. He suffered vertigo, probably by way of aggravation of pre-existing vertigo. But what was found against him when he appealed to the tribunal which dismissed his appeal on 18 March 1999 was that his condition was not permanent and therefore not compensable. 2   This arises in this way - under the Act it is not every act of violence which generates a right to compensation. The only act of violence which generates such a right are acts leading to injuries which are compensable injuries under the definition of the Act. The Act sets out the definition by means of a table which is in schedule 1 to the Act of what are compensable injuries. On that table there is no item which specifically deals with vertigo. One is not strictly limited to the table and may look at the table to see if something is similar to one of the items in the table. In the present case the tribunal…