Publication
51077 (23 June 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: 51077
Decision: Pursuant to Paragraphs 11 and 15 of the Scheme, the application is refused.
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. By way of application form submitted to the Tribunal under cover of letter from his solicitors dated [ ], the applicant claims compensation for an incident which occurred on [ ] in [ ].
3. The applicant stated that he had attended a pub in [ ] with a cousin and a friend. At the time of the incident, the applicant and the others were standing outside the pub smoking. Unknown to them, a fight had broken out inside the pub. The applicant returned to the pub where he was hit with a stool on the arm and the face.
4. The person who threw the stool at the applicant had just come into the pub in the company of others. The applicant’s cousin was also assaulted in the same fight.
5. The applicant reported this to [ ] Garda Station, and attended [ ] Hospital for dental treatment and to [ ] hospital. The applicant suffered lacerations and bruising to his arm, and a cut lip. Further, the applicant had some teeth knocked out and others were loose.
6. The applicant was seeking employment at the time of the incident, and at the time of his application was expected to be incapacitated for a further two weeks.
7. The applicant claims compensation from the Tribunal for medical expenses, and taxi fares for hospital visits.
8. On [ ], the Secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the Superintendent of [ ] Garda Station seeking a report outlining the details of the event which gave rise to the applicant’s injuries.
9. No response was received to this letter.
10. On [ ], the Secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representatives asking if the applicant still wished to pursue his application and, if so, to forward the required documentation, including original receipts and vouching documentation in regard to the applicant’s out of pocket expenses arising from his personal injuries. The Secretariat informed the applicant’s legal representative that, in the absence of same by [ ], the applicant’s file would be sent to a Member of the Tribunal for a decision.
11. No response was received to this letter.
12. The following documents were furnished to the Tribunal Member for determination:
a. Completed application form, signed by the applicant and submitted under cover of letter from his legal representative dated [ ];
b. Letter from the secretariat of the Tribunal to the applicant’s legal representative dated [ ];
c. Letter from the secretariat of the Tribunal to the Superintendent, [ ] Garda Station dated [ ];
d. Letter from the secretariat of the Tribunal to the applicant dated [ ].
13. Arising from the foregoing an issue arises with regard to the necessity of an applicant to give the Tribunal all reasonable assistance in order for the Tribunal to make a determination whether an award of compensation should be made.
14. Paragraph 11 of the Scheme in place at the time of the applicant’s application 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.”
15. 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 encourages applicants to give the Tribunal reasonable assistance.
16. 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.
17. The applicant has not furnished any medical reports or any other medical documentation to the Tribunal to show the extent of his injuries and the treatment he received as a result.
18. It is noted that Paragraph 15 of the scheme which was in place at the time of the events which gave rise to this application:
“Compensation will be reduced by the value of the entitlement of the victim or claimant to social welfare benefits payable as a result of the injury and will be reduced, to the extent determined by the Tribunal, in respect of the entitlement of the victim to receive, under his conditions of employment, wages or salary while on sick leave.”
19. It is observed that without evidence of the expenses incurred, particulars of miscellaneous expenses or any documentation relating to employment-related income since the incident, there is no information upon which the Tribunal can base an assessment of compensation, having regard to the value of any social welfare benefits or employer benefits received by the applicant.
20. The applicant claims compensation for travel expenses and medical expenses However, the applicant did not provide any original receipts for these expenses.
21. The documents in question are integral to the formation of any determination.
22. On [ ], the secretariat of the Tribunal wrote to the applicant’s legal representatives inviting particulars of any injuries arising from the incident, and asking the applicant to submit any vouching documentation to support the application for compensation.
23. There was no response to this letter.
24. The Tribunal finds that because of the integral nature of the documentation sought to the decision-making process, and the elapse of time with no communication from the Applicant (despite request), that there has been a failure to give reasonable assistance to the Tribunal.
25. The application is refused.
Peter Stafford BL
23 June 2022