Publication
53922 (3 September 2023)
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
In the matter of an application under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted
Decision of a Single Member
Name of applicant: [ ]
Application number: 53922
Date of incident: [ ]
Date of application: [ ]
Decision outcome: Application refused pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the Scheme.
1. Mr. [ ] (‘the Applicant’) has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’). The Applicant has submitted a completed application form in respect of his claim which was received by the Tribunal on [ ].
2. On [ ] the Applicant, who was just short of his [ ] birthday, was assaulted by a named individual in [ ]. The Applicant suffered head and facial injuries including a broken jaw, requiring the insertion of metal plates, damage to his teeth and cuts and bruises to his face.
3. The incident was reported to Gardaí who investigated and have provided a report in respect of the incident dated [ ]. The Applicant has not provided the Tribunal with a copy of his Garda statement and his application form is silent in respect of how the incident unfolded. The Applicant’s assailant, a juvenile at the time of the incident, was dealt with by way of juvenile caution and was therefore not convicted of any offence.
4. The Applicant has claimed for loss of earnings for an approximately four-week period, together with various out-of-pocket expenses which arise as a a result of the incident.
5. Paragraph 13 of the Scheme states:
‘No compensation will be payable where the Tribunal is satisfied that the victim was responsible either because of provocation or otherwise, for the offence giving rise to his injuries and the Tribunal may reduce the amount of an award where, it its opinion, the victim has been partially responsible for the offence.’
6. The Garda report states, at paragraph 5:
‘Suspected offender (a minor at the time) took offence to approaches made by [ ] (sic) at his [ ]-year-old [ ]. Offender lost his temper and struck [ ] (sic) numerous times to the head causing serious injuries.’
7. In the instant case the Applicant has not provided any account as to how the incident occurred. The Tribunal is therefore bound apply the ‘best evidence rule’ and to infer from the evidence contained in the Garda report that the Applicant was responsible for the offence giving rise to his injuries as per Paragraph 13 of the Scheme.
8. For the avoidance of doubt the Tribunal has paid particular attention to the wording of Paragraph 13 of the Scheme, particularly the use of the word ‘offence’. The paragraph is explicitly worded to mean that notwithstanding an Applicant being the victim of an ‘offence’ (in this case assault) no compensation will be payable where the Tribunal forms the opinion that the Applicant was responsible for the offence – that is to say that but for an Applicant’s behaviour (in the instant case making approaches to the assailant’s [ ] who was significantly younger than the Applicant) the offence would not have taken place. The argument that the violence used in the commission of the offence was excessive does not arise according to the strict wording of Paragraph 13. Excessive violence, as in the instant case, goes to making the behaviour an offence and disallowing a criminal defence such as self-defence, rather than allowing an Applicant to sidestep the provisions of Paragraph 13.
9. For the reasons set out above the Tribunal refuses the Applicant’s application pursuant of Paragraph 13 of the Scheme.
10. N/A.
11. N/A.
12. N/A.
13. Nil.
Marc Murphy
Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
3 September 2023