DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

1. [1]
   This is an application for a compensation order pursuant to section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”).

2. [2]
   The injuries giving rise to the application were suffered as a result of a personal offence for which the respondent was convicted on indictment on 13 June 2007, namely assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed.

Facts

3. [3]
   The applicant was attacked by the respondent in the bedroom of his residence on 16 April 2006. He was struck a few times with an iron bar before he fought off the respondent (“the incident”).

Injuries

4. [4]
   The applicant suffered the following injuries as a consequence of the incident:

• Two scalp lacerations, one on the right side 2.5 centimetres in length and one on the left side approximately 7 centimetres in length;
• Bruising and abrasions to his left forearm, left lower ribs and left foot;
• Psychological sequelae

The relevant law

5. [5]
   COVA establishes a scheme for the payment of compensation to the victims of certain indictable offences including those who suffer “injury” as defined in section 20, being “bodily injury, mental or nervous shock, pregnancy or any injury specified in the compensation table as prescribed under a regulation.”

6. [6]
   Pursuant to section 25 of COVA, a compensation order may only be made up to the scheme maximum of $75,000 specified in section 2 of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (“COVR”) using the percentages listed for an injury specified in the Compensation Table in SCHEDULE 1 of COVA. In R v Jones ex parte Zaicov^[1] Homes J described the process in the following terms:

“Thus, my examination of the section convinces me that a two or three stage process is entailed. Where there is more than one injury, the first step is to arrive at the amounts in respect of each injury, the second is to add those amounts together, and the third, to arrive at the compensation order.”         

7. [7]
   Relevantly the Compensation Table prescribes:

• Item 1 Bruising/laceration etc (minor/moderate)…1%-3%
• Item 9 Fractured skull/head injury (no brain damage)…5%-15%
• Item 27 Facial disfigurement or bodily scarring (minor/moderate) …2%-10%
• Item 32 Mental or nervous shock (moderate)…10%-20%

8. [8]
   Section 25 of COVA also states that the court, in determining the amount that should be paid for an injury, “should have regard to everything relevant, including, for example, any behaviour of the applicant that directly or indirectly contributed to the injury.” Furthermore the process of assessing compensation pursuant to COVA does not involve applying principles used to decide common law damages for personal injuries and the maximum amount of compensation provided for is reserved for the most serious cases, with the amounts provided in other cases intended to be scaled accordingly.^[2] If an injury is not specifically listed in the Compensation Table the court must decide the amount of compensation by comparing the injury or injuries under injuries listed in the Compensation Table and having regard to the amounts that may be ordered to be paid for these injuries.^[3]

The Assessment

9. [9]
   Following the incident the applicant was taken by ambulance to the Cairns Base Hospital. The scalp lacerations were cleaned and sutured. The applicant complained of a mild headache. However, a report of Dr Hovinga of the hospital’s Emergency Department dated 27 July 2006 notes that the applicant did not have a skull fracture. The applicant records in his affidavit that the stitches he received “were removed about a week or two after the incident” and that he suffered from “bad headaches for several months”. A CT scan did not reveal any bleeding or fractures when the applicant was referred back to the hospital Emergency Department on 22 April 2006 because of “ongoing headache and vomiting”, according to Dr Hovinga.

10. [10]
    In her report dated 5 October 2008, Dr Richardson, psychologist, concludes that the applicant is suffering from “moderate to severe symptomatology associated with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and mild to moderate Depression”. She records that the incident has had notable impacts on the applicant’s lifestyle.

11. [11]
    The question arises whether the applicant should be separately compensated for scarring as a consequence of the scalp lacerations. Although I have been provided with photographs of the injuries sustained by him in the incident, I have not been provided with any information as to the extent of any scarring which resulted. Based on these photographs I conclude that any scarring would be confined to two areas well within the hairline on the top and back of the applicant’s scalp. In my view, on the evidence before me, any such scarring does not warrant a separate award pursuant to Item 27 of the Compensation Table.

12. [12]
    I am satisfied that the applicant did not contribute to the injury.

13. [13]
    Having regard to the evidence before me and in particular to the matters set out above, I assess compensation pursuant to COVA and the Compensation Table as follows:

Order

14. [14]
    I order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $22,500.00.