Walter (a pseudonym) v Alcorn

Link copied
Case Copied 14 min read

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Walter (a pseudonym) v Alcorn [2024] NSWDC 216
Hearing dates: 11 and 12 June 2024
Date of orders: 13 June 2024
Decision date: 13 June 2024
Jurisdiction:Civil
Before: Acting Judge Levy SC
Decision:

1. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $1,021,300, including prejudgment interest;

2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered;

3. The exhibits may be returned after 3 months from today’s date unless otherwise ordered;

4. Liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice if further or other orders are required.

Catchwords:

DAMAGES – assessment of compensatory general damages and aggravated damages – claim of historical child sexual abuse – plaintiff sexually abused by defendant on multiple occasions between the ages of 5 and 6 years

Legislation Cited:

Courts Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), s 6; s 7; s 8; s 9; s 10; s 12.

Cases Cited:

Cullen v Trappell [1980] HCA 10; (1980) 146 CLR 1

Najdovski v Crnojlovic [2008] NSWCA 175

Penrith City Council v Parks [2004] NSWCA 201

State of NSW v Moss (2000) 54 NSWLR 536; [2000] NSWCA 133

Texts Cited:

Australian Bureau of Statistics Bulletin, November 2023

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Walter, a pseudonym (Plaintiff)
John William Alcorn (Defendant)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr C Simpson (Plaintiff)
Defendant not represented

Solicitors:
Sommerville Laundry Lomax Solicitors (Plaintiff)
Defendant not represented
File Number(s): 2023/00197314
Publication restriction: A non-publication order applies to the name of the plaintiff and non-professional witnesses.

Judgment

Non-publication order

  1. These reasons relate to the plaintiff’s claim for damages for historical child sexual abuse. At the commencement of the hearing a non-publication order was made to prohibit publication of the name of the plaintiff and the names of non-professional witnesses or persons identified in the evidence. Accordingly, the plaintiff has been assigned the pseudonym of “Walter”: Courts Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW); s 6, s 7, s 8, s 9, s 12. There is no order restricting publication of the name of the defendant.

Nature of case

  1. The plaintiff is now aged 38 years. He brought these proceedings claiming compensatory common law damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages in respect of a series of sexual assaults that the defendant, John William Alcorn, as an adult, committed upon him on multiple occasions between 1991 and 1992, when the plaintiff was aged between five and six years.

  2. The defendant, who has been described as a serial paedophile, is presently serving an 8-year term of imprisonment for the sexual offending that he perpetrated on the plaintiff, and on other vulnerable persons.

  3. On 19 December 2023, when the defendant was represented by a solicitor, he consented to judgment being entered against him in this case, with damages to be assessed. It appears that the defendant has some property, as may be inferred from the fact that he has issued a person with an operative power of attorney…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Walter (a pseudonym) v Alcorn and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2024] NSWDC 216
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiff, Walter (a pseudonym), initiated legal proceedings against the defendant, Alcorn, for historical child sexual abuse. The abuse occurred on multiple occasions when the plaintiff was between the ages of 5 and 6 years old. The dispute was adjudicated in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff sought compensatory general damages for the abuse, as well as aggravated damages for the nature and manner of the abuse. The defendant contested the claims, arguing that the plaintiff's damages were excessive and that there was insufficient evidence to support the award of aggravated damages.

The court was required to determine the appropriate amount of compensatory general damages to compensate for the harm suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the abuse. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the nature and manner of the abuse warranted an award of aggravated damages. The court also had to assess the credibility and reliability of the plaintiff's evidence, as well as the defendant's defence. The court considered various factors, including the severity and duration of the abuse, the impact on the plaintiff's mental and physical health, and the plaintiff's ability to lead a normal life.

The court found that the plaintiff's evidence was credible and reliable, and that the defendant was liable for the abuse. The court awarded the plaintiff compensatory general damages in the sum of $750,000, and aggravated damages in the sum of $271,300. The court also awarded prejudgment interest in the sum of $0. The court found that the total amount of damages was appropriate and just, taking into account the severity and impact of the abuse on the plaintiff. The court rejected the defendant's argument that the damages were excessive, and found that the award of aggravated damages was warranted given the nature and manner of the abuse.

The court made several orders in favour of the plaintiff. The court awarded the plaintiff a verdict and judgment in the sum of $1,021,300, including prejudgment interest. The court also ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis, unless otherwise ordered. The court further ordered that the exhibits may be returned after three months from the date of the judgment, unless otherwise ordered. Finally, the court granted liberty to apply on seven days' notice if further or other orders were required.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $1,021,300, including prejudgment interest;

2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiff’s costs of the proceedings on the ordinary basis unless otherwise ordered;

3. The exhibits may be returned after 3 months from today’s date unless otherwise ordered;

4. Liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice if further or other orders are required.

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.