VL v HHL - [2010] QDC 12

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

VL v HHL [2010] QDC 12

PARTIES:

VL

(Applicant)

V

HHL

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

3418/09

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

29 January 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

21 December 2009

JUDGE:

Irwin DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $24,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld).

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation – respondent convicted of one count each of unlawful stalking, deprivation of liberty and assault occasioning bodily harm and three counts of rape – where the applicant suffered severe bruising, a minor back injury and severe mental and nervous shock as a result of the offences – assessment of compensation

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where in addition to a claim on the basis of severe bruising the applicant made a claim for facial disfigurement – where no facial disfigurement beyond that associated with the bruising – whether practical to make separate assessments for each item without duplication for what is in reality one episode of injury

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where applicant suffered a post traumatic stress disorder as a result of the offences – where the post traumatic stress disorder compensable as mental or nervous shock – where there were risk factors predisposing the applicant to develop post traumatic stress disorder arising from her previous relationship with the respondent and the respondent’s previous stalking behaviour – whether in these circumstances there were other factors than the respondent’s offending which contributed to the post traumatic stress disorder which required some allowance to be made or a lower percentage of compensation to be fixed

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where applicant compensated for mental or nervous shock as a result of the offence – where the offences included sexual offences – whether any of the adverse impacts to those offences were not relied upon to support the diagnosis of mental or nervous shock – whether applicant suffered a prescribed injury to which s 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) applicable

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld), s 20, s 21, s 22, s 24, s 25, s 26

Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld), s…

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 VL v HHL

Details

AGLC: VL v HHL [2010] QDC 12
Case: [2010] QDC 12
Decision Date: 29 January 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of VL v HHL concerns an application for criminal compensation by the applicant, VL, against the respondent, HHL, who was convicted of multiple offences including unlawful stalking, deprivation of liberty, assault occasioning bodily harm, and three counts of rape. VL sought compensation for the severe bruising, minor back injury, and severe mental and nervous shock she suffered as a result of the offences. The legal issues before the court were the appropriate assessment of compensation for the injuries sustained, the advisability of making separate assessments for bruising and facial disfigurement, and the extent to which pre-existing risk factors influenced the compensation for mental or nervous shock.

The court determined that while VL did suffer severe bruising, there was no evidence of facial disfigurement beyond that associated with the bruising. The court considered it impractical to make separate assessments for each item of injury without duplication, as they were part of the same episode. Regarding the mental or nervous shock, the court acknowledged that VL had pre-existing risk factors for developing post-traumatic stress disorder due to her previous relationship with the respondent and the respondent's previous stalking behaviour. However, the court found that these factors did not entirely absolve the respondent of responsibility for the compensation payable for mental or nervous shock. The court also considered whether any adverse impacts of the sexual offences were not relied upon to support the diagnosis of mental or nervous shock, and whether VL suffered a prescribed injury as defined by s 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld).

Following the assessment of the injuries and the considerations of pre-existing risk factors, the court concluded that the respondent should pay the applicant $24,750 by way of compensation. This sum was determined pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld), taking into account all the evidence and the nature of the injuries and their impact on VL.

The court ordered that the respondent, HHL, pay the applicant, VL, the sum of $24,750 by way of compensation. This amount reflects the court's comprehensive assessment of the injuries sustained, the impact of pre-existing risk factors, and the statutory framework governing compensation for victims of crime.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $24,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld).

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:	VL v HHL [2010] QDC 12
PARTIES:	VL (Applicant) V HHL (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	3418/09
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application for criminal compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	29 January 2010
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	21 December 2009
JUDGE:	Irwin DCJ
ORDER:	*The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $24,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act* 1995 (Qld).**
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation – respondent convicted of one count each of unlawful stalking, deprivation of liberty and assault occasioning bodily harm and three counts of rape – where the applicant suffered severe bruising, a minor back injury and severe mental and nervous shock as a result of the offences – assessment of compensation CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where in addition to a claim on the basis of severe bruising the applicant made a claim for facial disfigurement – where no facial disfigurement beyond that associated with the bruising – whether practical to make separate assessments for each item without duplication for what is in reality one episode of injury CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where applicant suffered a post traumatic stress disorder as a result of the offences – where the post traumatic stress disorder compensable as mental or nervous shock – where there were risk factors predisposing the applicant to develop post traumatic stress disorder arising from her previous relationship with the respondent and the respondent’s previous stalking behaviour – whether in these circumstances there were other factors than the respondent’s offending which contributed to the post traumatic stress disorder which required some allowance to be made or a lower percentage of compensation to be fixed CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation –where applicant compensated for mental or nervous shock as a result of the offence – where the offences included sexual offences – whether any of the adverse impacts to those offences were not relied upon to support the diagnosis of mental or nervous shock – whether applicant suffered a prescribed injury to which s 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) applicable Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld), s 20, s 21, s 22, s 24, s 25, s 26 Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld), s…