DEL v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2017] NSWCATAD 376

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DEL v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2017] NSWCATAD 376 Hearing dates: 8 December 2017 Date of orders: 22 December 2017 Decision date: 22 December 2017 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: J McAteer Senior Member Decision: 1. The decision of the Respondent is affirmed. Catchwords: VICTIMS Support – Administrative law – meaning of term GBH – Whether injury satisfies GBH Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 Victims Rights and Support Regulation 2013 Cases Cited: Aldridge v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation [2008] NSWSC 724 ATX v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation [2015] NSWCATAP 42 BQG v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2015] NSWCATAD 63 CZU v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2017] NSWCATAD 240 Category: Principal judgment Parties: DEL (Applicant) Commissioner of Victims Rights (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: N/A

Solicitors: DEL (Applicant In person) S Sabesan, Victims Services Legal (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/00250777 Publication restriction: Section 64 (1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act applies to the identity of the applicant.

Reasons for decision

Introduction 1. The applicant was a victim of a robbery whereby she was physically assaulted. The evidence established that as a result of the assault and robbery the applicant received physical and psychological injuries. The applicant also had property stolen during the assault – (a sum of money). The applicant applied to Victims Services for payments and other assistance under the victims support scheme which is available to victims of violent crime. 2. Whilst the applicant received financial support and assistance from the scheme, the amount she received by a way of a recognition payment (a prescribed lump sum) was paid at the lowest category - $1,500.00. This payment was made on the basis that whilst the applicant was a victim of violent crime, she had only established an entitlement to a Category D recognition payment in the sum of $1,500.00 as she had been the victim of an assault (not resulting in) grievous bodily harm. This finding was internally reviewed and the initial decision was upheld. 3. After a consideration of all of the evidence and material before me, for the reasons which follow, including that the further evidence before the Tribunal does not establish grievous bodily harm, the Tribunal upholds the decision of the respondent and that decision will therefore be affirmed.