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 15 March 2007, namely unlawful wounding.

Facts

3. [3]
   On 7 October 2006 the applicant and the respondent had been drinking heavily. An argument developed between them. The respondent struck the applicant on the left side of his head with a stick. He grabbed the stick and struck her on the shoulder. The respondent then grabbed a knife and stabbed the applicant in the back. The applicant fled and the respondent chased him, caught up to him and stabbed him again in the back (“the incident”).

Injuries

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

• A laceration to the right side of his back in the scapular area;

• A laceration to the left side of his back in the scapular area;

• A small superficial graze to the left forehead;

• 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 24 Gunshot/stab wounds (minor)…6%-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]
   I have been provided with a report of Dr Sadewasser of the Cairns Base Hospital Emergency Department dated 30 October 2006. It addresses the applicant’s physical injuries. The small superficial graze is not compensable as it was not suffered as a result of a personal offence for which the respondent was convicted on indictment. The lacerations to the applicant’s back are described in detail. The right laceration was 1.5 cm long and 2 mm wide and penetrated as far as the full thickness of the dermis. The left laceration was 2.5 cm – 3 cm long, about 3 mm wide and penetrated through all layers of the skin. There was no sign of an internal injury.

10. [10]
    In her report dated 25 August 2008, Dr Richardson, psychologist, concluded that the applicant was suffering from a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder “in the moderate range”.

11. [11]
    Although the applicant was stabbed following a physical altercation during which both the respondent and the applicant struck each other with a stick, the respondent was apparently the aggressor. There can, in any event, be no justification for stabbing the applicant on either occasion, particularly when this occurred without warning, in his back and, on the second occasion, as he attempted to flee. I am therefore satisfied that the applicant did not contribute to the injury.

12. [12]
    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:

Item 24: - 8%  $  6,000.00

Item 32: - 10%  $  7,500.00

    $13,500.00

Order

13. [13]
    I order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $13,500.00.