Publication
F/53913 (5 April 2023)
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
From Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Published on
Last updated on
Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted - General Scheme
Three Member Decision
Application number: 53913
Name of applicant: [ ]
Name of deceased: [ ]
Date of incident: [ ]
Date application received: [ ]
Decision: No award
The Applicant applied to the Tribunal on behalf of the statutory dependents of her late partner, [ ]. [ ] was the victim of a crime of violence which occurred on [ ] at [ ] resulting in his death. [ ].
The fatal crime in this case was the subject of report by way of emergency 999 calls and investigated by Detective Branch of An Garda Siochana in [ ]. A number of people were subsequently arrested and questioned, however no prosecution was directed. The Applicant and the victim’s family co-operated with the investigation and provided all necessary assistance to An Garda Siochana. Neither the Applicant, nor any other dependent, has received any payment of compensation at any time.
The General Scheme provides that the Tribunal may pay compensation for out-of-pocket expenses in respect of personal injury, where the injury is directly attributable to a crime of violence, subject to the provisions of the scheme. Amounts claimed must be vouched and/or supported by appropriate documentation. In addition to out-of-pocket expenses, the Tribunal may make payment by way of solatium to the dependents of a deceased person in cases involving fatal incidents. The Tribunal is entirely responsible for deciding in any particular case whether compensation is payable under the scheme.
Paragraph 21 of the General Scheme (pre-April 2021) states that “Applications should be made as soon as possible but, except in circumstances determined by the Tribunal to justify exceptional treatment, not later than three months after the event giving rise to the injury”. In this case, the application was received on the [ ], some [ ] after the fatal incident and substantially outside the specified period of three months. This division of the Tribunal must therefore determine whether circumstances arise in this particular case which justify exceptional treatment.
The Applicant, when queried regarding the late application in [ ], stated that “at the time of this fatal incident my life & the life of my family was completely shattered and turned upside down. My only priority were [ ]. I never knew at the time of this incident that an application for this existed. I had no idea I was entitled to do so until some time later.”
Ignorance of the scheme on its own has never been regarded by the Tribunal as giving rise to exceptional circumstances. However, the Tribunal accepts that the fatal incident in this case was particularly traumatic and left the Applicant in very difficult circumstances dealing with her own loss and trauma whilst suddenly having sole responsibility for [ ]. The ongoing Garda investigations and failure to prosecute any person in respect of the killing gave rise to additional and prolonged grief and trauma in this case. The Tribunal further notes that the issue of the three month time limit and the reasons for the delay in submitting the application were only first raised with the Applicant in [ ] and no query regarding this issue was contained in the application form. This division of the Tribunal further notes the views expressed by the courts in relation to consideration of these matters in recent decisions. Whilst noting the inordinate period of delay in this case, this division of the Tribunal determines that the circumstances in this case are such to justify exceptional treatment.
Dependents are defined in Section 47 of the Civil Liability Act 1961 as amended.
The Tribunal notes a claim is made in respect of the following dependents in this case as follows:
[ ] ([ ])
[ ] ([ ])
[ ] ([ ])
[ ] ([ ])
A waiver of any claim to compensation under the Scheme was submitted by the victim’s mother, [ ], and [ ].
The Application indicates that the dependents incurred Funeral Expenses of €3,209 (unvouched), headstone costs of €830 (receipt submitted) and cost of refreshments of €450 (€70 vouched). It is unclear whether a bereavement or funeral grant was received towards the funeral expenses.
A claim is also made for financial dependency loss due to the death of [ ], whereby it is alleged in the application that he contributed the sum of €100 per week for his own upkeep and a sum of €50 per week for household expenses and maintenance of the home. This claim is unvouched and not the subject of any report. The Tribunal further notes that the application states that [ ] was unemployed at the time of the fatal incident.
In addition to the foregoing, the Tribunal may award solatium in a fatal case, subject to a capped statutory amount, in respect of mental distress.
Paragraph 14 of the General Scheme (pre-April 2021) states that “No compensation will be payable where the Tribunal is satisfied that the conduct of the victim, his character or his way of life make it inappropriate that he should be granted an award and the Tribunal may reduce the amount of an award where, in its opinion, it is appropriate to do so having regard to the conduct, character or way of life of the victim.”
The Tribunal has considered the contents of a Garda Report in this matter and notes that [ ] had the following conviction recorded against him at the time of the incident:
- Section [ ] Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994
- Section [ ] Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994
- Section [ ] Non Fatal Offences Against The Person Act 1997
- [ ] convictions under Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
- [ ] convictions of [ ] Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
- [ ] convictions [ ] Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
- [ ] convictions [ ] Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
- [ ] convictions [ ] Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
- [ ] convictions [ ] Section [ ] Firearms Act 1925
- [ ] Section [ ] Road Traffic Act 1961
In addition, this division of the Tribunal notes that [ ] had been one of a number of people charged with offences under the [ ] Act. [ ]. It is clear from the facts of this case that [ ] killing was planned by criminals and carried out by a “hit squad”. The Tribunal can only conclude, on the balance of probabilities, that the events which occurred on [ ] were directly related to [ ] involvement in criminal activity.
[ ] was shot and killed in a planned hit on [ ]. Whilst a number of people were arrested and questioned in relation to the crime, no person was prosecuted in relation to his murder. The incident was clearly a crime of violence resulting in fatal injury and one which may be considered under the requirements and terms of the Scheme.
The completed application in this case was received on the [ ] and was very substantially late. However, this division of the Tribunal accepts, for the reasons outlined in this decision, that circumstances arise in this case which justify exceptional treatment.
The Tribunal must, thereafter, consider the particulars and facts of the case under the terms and rules of the scheme. In this case, this division of the Tribunal determines, on the balance of probabilities, that the killing of [ ] was directly related to his involvement in criminal activity. The Tribunal therefore finds that the conduct, character and way of life of the victim were such that it is appropriate that no award should be made in accordance with the terms of Paragraph 14 of the scheme.
Accordingly, the Tribunal makes no award in this case.
Dated the 5th day of April 2023.
Cathal Lombard.
Conor Heaney.
Georgina Robinson.