Busacker v VCFC [2002] NSWDC 19

Busacker v VCFC [2002] NSWDC 19

The Tribunal did not err in law or deny procedural fairness; s30 issues were always relevant, and the appellant failed to provide persuasive material originally. No substantial arguable case for leave to appeal is established.

Parties
Applicant: Nadine Busacker; Respondent: Victims Compensation Fund Corporation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, S30 Victims Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996, Delay in Police Reporting
Victims Compensation Procedural Law Procedural Fairness S30 Victims Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996 Delay in Police Reporting

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nadine Busacker

Applicant

Victims Compensation Fund Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the appellant denied procedural fairness in the Tribunal's determination?
  2. 2 Did the Tribunal err by deciding the matter on grounds different from the Assessor regarding delay of reporting and s30?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal did not err in law or deny procedural fairness; s30 issues were always relevant, and the appellant failed to provide persuasive material originally. No substantial arguable case for leave to appeal is established.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • application for leave to appeal dismissed
  • no order as to costs