Publication
50420 (17 September 2022)
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: 50420
Date of incident: [ ]
Date of application: [ ]
Decision outcome: Application refused pursuant to Paragraph 21.
1. [ ] has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’).
2. In his application for compensation under the Scheme, received on the [ ], the Applicant stated that he was assaulted in his own home by three men with baseball bats. He said that he suffered a broken leg, bruised ribs and bruising all over his body, along with loss of hearing for three weeks. He said that he left the country after the assault as he was in fear.
3. There is a Garda Report on file, received on the [ ]. The report contains a statement of Detective [ ], who states that the assault was reported by the Applicant’s sister on the [ ]. Garda [ ] went to [ ] Hospital ,[ ] to question [ ], who was being treated for his injuries. The assault occurred following [ ] [ ], later claimed that the Applicant had assaulted her. Soon after the said argument, three men and a woman arrived at the flat and attacked [ ]. Three people were prosecuted in relation to the assault. The Applicant was also charged with assault. The Applicant received €[ ], in compensation from [ ]. The Applicant, himself was convicted of assault in the District Court to [ ] imprisonment and fined €[ ], [ ].
4. The Applicant submitted letters from companies where he had worked as a [ ], stating that he did not work after the accident. The Applicant was in receipt of disability benefit at all material times.
5. Paragraph 21 states that ‘Applications should be made as soon as possible but, except in circumstances determined by the Tribunal to justify exceptional treatment, not later than three months after the event giving rise to the injury’.
6. The Applicant, in this, case did not bring his application within the requisite time- period. The Application was made over six months following the assault.
7. The Applicant states, in his application form, that the reason for the delay was that he left the country after the assault as he was afraid. He said that he did not go out socialising since the incident for fear of running into the perpetrators. The Applicant said that he was just back on his feet again at the time of making the application. The Applicant did not, however, produce any medical reports to the Tribunal.
8. The Tribunal notes that there are no medical reports on file to suggest that the Applicant would have been unable to submit an application within the required time period. It appears that the application was late as the Applicant left the country following the assault. The mere fact of leaving the country does not prevent an Applicant from submitting an application to the Tribunal. The Tribunal finds, in the circumstances, that the Applicant has not discharged the burden of proof to show that exceptional circumstances exist which would allow it to extend the time in this case, particularly in circumstances where no objective evidence has been provided to show that he was not in a position to submit his claim. Being outside of the country cannot be said to be an exceptional circumstance for the purposes of the scheme.
9. In the circumstances, the Applicant’s case must fail.
Majella Twomey
Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
17 September 2022