EPU v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2022] NSWCATAD 3

EPU v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2022] NSWCATAD 3

The Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that an incident occurred on 23 December 2015 in which a glass bottle was thrown at EPU and struck him in the face, causing significant facial injuries, so EPU was a primary victim of an act of violence and the assault resulted in grievous bodily harm. However, because the evidence contained significant inconsistencies, EPU did not adequately address police material suggesting his possible participation, and he made a conscious decision not to provide a witness statement to police despite being able to do so, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the act occurred in the manner alleged in the 2021 declarations and reduced the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Victims Support and Recognition Payment Decision / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
The Respondent's decision dated 14 October 2020 was set aside and a substituted decision was made approving a reduced Category C recognition payment of $3,000.
Legal Topics
['recognition Payment' 'act of Violence' 'primary Victim' 'assault Resulting in Grievous Bodily Harm' 'reduction of Victims Support' 'failure to Assist Police Investigation']
['administrative Law' 'victims Rights and Support'] ['recognition Payment' 'act of Violence' 'primary Victim' 'assault Resulting in Grievous Bodily Harm' 'reduction of Victims Support' 'failure to Assist Police Investigation']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review of Victims Support and Recognition Payment Decision / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether EPU established on the balance of probabilities that he was a primary victim of an act of violence for the purposes of ss 19 and 20 of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the act of violence resulted in grievous bodily harm making EPU eligible for a Category C recognition payment.' 'Whether the recognition payment should be reduced under ss 44(1)(d) and (e) of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that an incident occurred on 23 December 2015 in which a glass bottle was thrown at EPU and struck him in the face, causing significant facial injuries, so EPU was a primary victim of an act of violence and the assault resulted in grievous bodily harm. However, because the evidence contained significant inconsistencies, EPU did not adequately address police material suggesting his possible participation, and he made a conscious decision not to provide a witness statement to police despite being able to do so, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the act occurred in the manner alleged in the 2021 declarations and reduced the...

Court Disposition

The Respondent's decision dated 14 October 2020 was set aside and a substituted decision was made approving a reduced Category C recognition payment of $3,000.

Orders

  • ['The decision of the Respondent dated 14 October 2020 is set aside and the Tribunal makes a substituted decision.' 'EPU is a primary victim of an act of violence on the balance of probabilities for the purposes of ss 19 and 20 of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW).' 'EPU was the victim of an assault...