Publication
23765 (24 August 2022)
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted
Decision of one member of the Tribunal pursuant to section 25 of the Scheme
Applicant: [ ]
Date of injury: [ ]
Date of application: [ ]
Case reference: 23765
Decision: The application is refused, pursuant to Paragraph 11 of the Scheme.
1. [ ] (“the applicant”) has made a claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (“the Scheme”).
2. The application form was signed by the applicant on [ ]. At the time of the application, the applicant was [ ] years old and the application was made by his father, [ ]. The application form was submitted to the Tribunal by the applicant’s solicitor under cover of letter dated [ ] and stamped as received by the Tribunal on the same date.
3. In his application, the applicant stated that he was injured at around [ ] on [ ] outside the [ ] by [ ]. The applicant stated that he and a friend were waiting outside the nightclub when he was approached by a woman called [ ] who accused him of talking about her. Suddenly [ ] ran towards the applicant and headbutted him, knocked him to the floor and repeatedly punched and kicked him.
4. A nightclub bouncer intervened. [ ] attempted to attack the applicant again, but the applicant’s friends were able to prevent this. A Garda Car passed and assisted the applicant. The applicant was able to identify the assailant to Gardai, who arrested [ ].
5. The applicant attended [ ] hospital where he was treated for a wound to the forehead and eye.
6. The applicant claims compensation for hospital charges (€40) doctor’s fees (€35) and medication (€6.81). The applicant was not in work at the time of the injury and makes no application for compensation for loss of earnings.
7. The applicant stated that he was able to claim compensation from [ ] through his father’s policy.
8. On [ ], the applicant’s legal representative submitted to the Tribunal a copy of the Garda Report of the incident. The Garda Report includes statements from:
a. Garda [ ], [ ] Garda Station
b. [ ] (applicant)
c. [ ] (assailant)
d. [ ] (witness)
e. [ ] (witness)
f. [ ] (witness)
g. [ ] (witness) (and supplemental statement)
h. [ ] (witness)
i. Garda [ ], [ ] Garda Station
j. Sergeant [ ], [ ] Garda Station
k. Sergeant [ ], [ ] Garda Station
l. Garda [ ], [ ] Garda Station
The Garda Report also includes a copy of the Garda Siochana Custody Record for [ ] and charge sheet for [ ] stating that he was charged with S3 assault causing harm against the applicant.
9. The Tribunal has also had the benefit of a medical report prepared by Mr [ ], consultant in emergency medicine dated [ ], prepared for An Garda Siochana.
10. On [ ], the secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representative acknowledging receipt of the application and seeking copies of the applicant’s medical expenses and other vouching documentation relating to out-of-pocket expenses. The applicant was also asked to submit details of any money expended by [ ], and to submit a statement of same.
11. On [ ], the applicant’s legal representative provided a Schedule from the [ ] Medical Aid Society ([ ]) stating that €170.81 had been paid to the applicant, broken down as:
a. Drugs: €76.81
b. Laboratory Medicine Service: €54
c. A&E [ ] Hospital: €40
12. On [ ], the secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representative seeking receipts of the applicant’s out of pocket expenses, including those paid by [ ], and seeking particulars of any civil case brought by the applicant against the assailant.
13. On [ ], the applicant’s legal representative wrote to the Tribunal seeking a decision in relation to the applicant’s application.
14. On [ ], the secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representative enclosing a copy of the letter of [ ] seeking receipts of the applicant’s expenses and noting that, while €46.81 of the applicant’s charges were paid by [ ], the only outstanding expense incurred by the applicant which was not discharged by [ ] was €35 doctor’s fee.
15. The applicant’s legal representative was asked that, if it was accepted that this was the extent of the applicant’s claim, then the Tribunal would make an award for that amount. The applicant’s legal representative was asked to confirm that this was the case.
16. On [ ], the secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representative asking if the applicant wished to pursue his claim, and, if so to submit the documentation sought, including receipts to vouch his claim for compensation for out-of-pocket expenses. The applicant was informed that, in absence of same, his file would be sent to a Member of the Tribunal for determination.
17. No response to this letter, or the letter of [ ] is on file.
18. I am satisfied that the applicant was a victim of a crime of violence within the meaning of the Scheme. I am also satisfied that the injuries sustained by the applicant arose as a direct consequence of that crime. I am satisfied that the applicant reported the matter to An Garda Síochána promptly.
19. Paragraph 11 of the Scheme reads: “No compensation will be payable to an applicant who has not, in the opinion of the Tribunal, given the Tribunal all reasonable assistance, in relation to any medical report that it may require, and otherwise.”
20. In determining whether a lack of reasonable assistance has been given such that compensation is not payable, consideration must be given to the scope and purpose of Paragraph 11. It effectively cuts applicants off from compensation and is thus a far-reaching provision. Its purpose is to serve as a sanction against those who do not co-operate with the Tribunal – its secondary purpose is to encourage applicants to give the Tribunal reasonable assistance.
21. The Tribunal should not rely on paragraph 11 to deny an applicant the potential for compensation in an irrational or arbitrary way. It seems logical to take into account two main factors: (i) the nature of the information or assistance sought by the Tribunal (and in particular whether its absence prevents a proper decision being made) and (ii) the frequency of requests and time elapsed wherein no adequate response has been received by the Tribunal.
22. The secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representative on [ ], [ ] and [ ] seeking receipts and other vouched documentation relating to the applicant’s out of pocket expenses incurred as a result of the injuries he sustained in [ ], particularly with reference to those expenses which were paid for by [ ], and details of any further expenses which were incurred but not covered by [ ].
23. No replies were received by the Tribunal containing the information sought.
24. The Tribunal finds that because of the integral nature of the documentation sought to the decision-making process, there is no information before the Tribunal to determine what expenses were incurred by the applicant, and therefore the level of compensation which should be paid to the applicant having regard to any expenses already covered by [ ].
25. Therefore applying Paragraph 11 of the Scheme, the application must be refused.
Peter Stafford BL
Member, Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
24 August 2022