CZU v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2017] NSWCATAD 240

CZU v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2017] NSWCATAD 240

The Tribunal found that while CZU suffered psychological injury due to an act of violence, the evidence did not establish that this amounted to 'very serious injury' or grievous bodily harm. Accordingly, she was eligible for a Category D, not Category C, recognition payment pursuant to s 35(4) of the Act.

Parties
Applicant: CZU; Respondent: Commissioner of Victims Rights
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Tribunal Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Decision of Senior Assessor dated 9 February 2017 affirmed.
Legal Topics
Recognition Payment, Assault, Grievous Bodily Harm, Actual Bodily Harm, Psychological Injury
Victims Rights Administrative Law Recognition Payment Assault Grievous Bodily Harm Actual Bodily Harm Psychological Injury

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CZU

Applicant

Commissioner of Victims Rights

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Tribunal Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the assault resulted in grievous bodily harm or actual bodily harm for recognition payment purposes under the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that while CZU suffered psychological injury due to an act of violence, the evidence did not establish that this amounted to 'very serious injury' or grievous bodily harm. Accordingly, she was eligible for a Category D, not Category C, recognition payment pursuant to s 35(4) of the Act.

Court Disposition

Decision of Senior Assessor dated 9 February 2017 affirmed.

Orders

  • The decision of the Senior Assessor dated 9 February 2017 is affirmed.