Publication
23721 (6 January 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: 23721
Date of incident: [ ]
Date of application: [ ]
Decision outcome: The application is refused under Article 9 of the scheme.
1. [ ] (‘the applicant’) has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’) for compensation under the Scheme, on the [ ] in respect of an incident which occurred on the [ ].
2. The application was in respect of an incident which took place in [ ] on the [ ] when the Applicant was attacked by [ ] outside of [ ]. The Applicant was attacked and pushed backwards through [ ] suffering lacerations. He had to receive twenty-three stitches over his left eye and temple and a large number of stitches in his right forearm. He suffered nerve damage to his temple and scalp which is detailed on the application form as totally numb. It is also noted that the Applicant suffered from depression from a number of years.
3. The matter was not reported to An Garda Siochana for a few days and in his application form he describes that his injuries still result in ongoing headaches and head symptoms, scarring and depression. He stated that he would furnish details of his out of pocket expenses including loss of earnings at a later stage. According to An Garda Siochana the incident was reported at [ ] on the night of the incident to Garda [ ].
4. [ ] reported that the Applicant was assaulted on the [ ] which the Tribunal accepts is a typographical error. It is noted from the report that he suffered multiple laceration to his forehead and right arm. He underwent a number of x-rays at [ ] Hospital. He had a deep laceration along the left hand side of his forehead and a laceration to his right arm. He developed quite a lot of swelling over the left side of his face around the laceration. In his assessment dated the [ ] Dr [ ] was of the view that he had suffered severe lacerations which had healed quite well but he was still left with some problem with his scalp due to damage to the superficial nerve in the scalp and this results in tenderness and numbness that he still experiences. Dr [ ] view was that it is likely that he is to some extent vulnerable to exacerbation of his depression and injuries. He opined that the injuries suffered were indeed traumatic and caused an exacerbation of his depression to the extent that he has been severely depressed for several months since the incident.
5. In [ ] the applicant was feeling so badly he was assessed by Doctor’s at the local Psychiatric Hospital and he continues to take anti-depressants and relaxing medication. The view of the GP was that he could not say that this assault caused the depression but he could certainly say that it exacerbated it.
6. A further medical note was submitted dated the [ ] by Dr [ ] Consultant Psychiatrist at [ ] Hospital which stated that the Applicant is a patient of his, that he is on anti-depressant medication and that he has depression with symptoms specifically headaches which are functional and not organic in origin. He is greatly incapacitated by these chronic symptoms.
7. The Tribunal was notified on the [ ] of the intention to bring an application to the Tribunal. The Application form was received by the Tribunal Secretariat in late [ ] and on the [ ] the Applicant’s Solicitors were written to by the Secretariat. It was noted that the application form submitted is a photocopy and they were requested to submit the original page five of the application form together with the applicant’s signature. In addition the Applicant’s Solicitors were informed that the Tribunal would require documentation in respect of the claimed net loss of earnings. In addition it was noted that vouchers and receipts would be furnished in due course.
8. On the [ ] the Tribunal was notified that Mr [ ] was convicted and sentenced at [ ] Circuit Court but it was noted that he had paid the sum of € [ ] to the injured party in two instalments. The Applicant’s Solicitors submitted on the [ ] that the Applicant was unemployed in the early part of [ ] but then ceased drawing Social Assistance as he had been appointed agent for a [ ] Company. It is alleged that he was in receipt of approximately €500 per week arising from this appointment. In support of this contention of appointment a letter of authorisation dated the [ ] was submitted confirming that the Applicant had been appointed for [ ]. No mention is made in this of salary or payments.
9. On the [ ] the Applicant’s Solicitors were written to acknowledging receipt of that letter and noting the compensation paid in the sum of €[ ]. It was pointed out that in order for the Tribunal to assess the net loss of earnings a copy of the P45 would have to be submitted. It was also pointed out to establish a claim for future loss of earnings a full Psychiatric report will be required to establish an inability to work.
10. The Applicant then proceeded for some unknown reason to lodge a separate application himself under application number 24032 and he was corresponded with directly by the Tribunal in that respect. In a response dated the [ ] the Secretariat for the Tribunal forwarded a copy of a statement received from the Department of Social Welfare confirming that the Applicant was in receipt of Unemployment assistance at the time of this incident. The subsequent response to that was a letter dated the [ ] from the Applicant’s Solicitors enquiring to know what was happening. This was replied to on the [ ] pointing out that a response to the correspondence of the [ ] was still awaited. Nothing further was heard.
11. On the [ ] the Applicant’s Solicitors were written to enclosing a copy of the last letter from the secretariat dated the [ ]. A request was made for the documentation requested including original receipts and vouching documentation in respect of out of pocket expenses. The Applicant’s Solicitors were advised that if the office did not hear from them by the [ ] the file will be sent to a Single Member for decision. Nothing further has been heard from either the applicant or his solicitors.
12. The report from Social Welfare clearly establishes the Applicant was in receipt of unemployment assistance on the [ ] of €118.80 per week. It is impossible to reconcile this with his allegation that he suffered a loss of earnings of €500 per week. No P45 has been furnished. No P60 been furnished. No supporting documentation that he was in receipt of any wage as alleged has been furnished by his employer. There are no tax returns to support this allegation and indeed it seems unlikely that they could ever be furnished given that the Applicant was in receipt of unemployment assistance at the time.
13. The Applicant’s work record prior to this incident does not establish any long term employment of such duration as would enable the Tribunal to make an assessment of any future loss of earnings. In addition not only is that position not supported by documentary evidence of an employment history but the psychiatric evidence submitted regarding ongoing depression would not support such a contention in any event. More importantly it is highly unlikely that the applicants given his prior work history would sustain consistently full time employment.
14. The Applicant has claimed that part of his out of pocket expenses were taxi bills (unvouched) of €280. No vouchers have been furnished in respect of these items and it is impossible for the Tribunal to determine as a matter of probability that the Applicant suffered these losses.
15. Article 9 provides “no compensation will be payable unless the Tribunal is satisfied that the injury is such that compensation of not less than €63.50 should be awarded”.
As no vouchers have been submitted to the Tribunal concerning the alleged out of pocket expenses it is as a matter of probability not possible for the Tribunal to make an award in this case.
16. Even if the relevant vouching documentation had been submitted the Applicant has a further difficulty in that under Article 16 (now Article 15) of the scheme it provides: “the Tribunal will deduct from the amount of an award under the Scheme any sums paid to or for the benefit of the victim or his dependents by way of compensation of damages from the offender or any person on the offender’s behalf following the injury”. The Applicant was in receipt of the sum of €[ ] in respect of compensation which is well in excess of the €280 unvouched taxi bill claim.
Accordingly the application is dismissed under Article 10 (now Article 9), Article 16 (now Article 15) of the scheme.
Martin G Lawlor
Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
6 January 2023