50087 (27 January 2023)

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal

In the matter of an application under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted

Decision of a Single Member

Name of applicant: [ ]

Application number: 50087

Date of incident: [ ]

Date of application: [ ]

Decision outcome: The application is refused under Article 1 and Article 23 of the Scheme.

1. [ ] (‘the applicant’) has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’) on the [ ] in respect of injuries received at an incident which occurred on the [ ] outside [ ] Hotel, [ ].

2. The Applicant states that he was walking outside after leaving a disco when he was hit by a [ ] into the mouth breaking both of his front teeth.

3. He was subsequently taken to [ ] Hospital for treatment. He said in his application form that he has had to have the teeth replaced. The application was lodged by his Solicitors [ ] & Company and received by the Tribunal on the [ ]. This was over twelve months following on from the incident in question.

4. On the [ ] the Applicant’s Solicitor forwarded a medical report from [ ] Dental Surgeon. In that report he detailed that the Applicant on examination had fractures of both central incisor teeth and bruising of his upper lip. He stated that he informed the Applicant that he should be referred to a Consultant who specialises in root canal treatment and crown and bridge restoration. He stated that his fee for the medical report was the sum of €255.

5. The Tribunal wrote back to Mr [ ] on the [ ] seeking a copy of the original report which was subsequently sent in on the [ ].

6. A letter was written to An Garda Siochana in the usual terms seeking details of the incident in question by the Tribunal. The response received on the [ ] was in the following terms: “As I understand from my telephone as this date the applicant’s Solicitors have withdrawn this application”. It was stated that [ ] made a statement to Sergeant [ ] of [ ] Garda Station in which he outlined how [ ] assaulted him. On the [ ] [ ] made a cautioned statement admitting the assault but alleging provocation. It would appear that [ ] mother subsequently contacted Sergeant [ ] and stated that she no longer wished to pursue the matter through the Courts as a settlement was made between [ ] and [ ]. Ms [ ] suggested that the Applicant had received compensation but did not reveal the amount.

7. On the [ ] [ ] formally withdrew the complaint by way of written statement. This correspondence from An Garda Siochana had followed on from earlier correspondence from [ ] dated the [ ] in which it had been stated: “Our client has instructed us that they no longer wish to proceed with this matter save and except the payment of the medical report of Dr [ ]”. The Applicant’s Solicitor was written to on the [ ] in the following terms: “I acknowledge receipt of your letter of the [ ] in which you state that your client no longer wishes to proceed with this application. I have enclosed a copy of correspondence from the Garda in which they have confirmed that your client no longer wishes to pursue the matter and that a settlement was made.

It would appear that you wish to put the application forward to a member of the Tribunal to claim the cost of a medical report."

8. I must bring to your attention to Article 23 of the scheme which states “that to qualify for compensation it will be necessary to indicate to the Tribunal that the offence given rise to the injury has been the subject of criminal proceedings and that the victim cooperated fully with the Garda investigation in order to bring about a conviction.”

9. I must also bring to your attention Article 16 of the scheme “the Tribunal will deduct from the amount of an award under the Scheme any sums paid to or for the benefit of the victim”.

10. On the [ ] the Tribunal wrote to [ ] in the following terms “I would be grateful if you could let the Secretariat know if your client still wishes to pursue this application. A copy of the most recent correspondence is attached for your information.

Please respond in writing quoting the above reference number [ ].

If no response is received by this date the application will be submitted to a Tribunal Member who will make a decision”.

11. No response was received to that letter.

12. Article 1 of the scheme provides “The Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal established under paragraph 16 of the scheme may pay compensation in accordance with the scheme in respect of personal injury where the injury is directly attributable by a crime of violence or as provided for in paragraph 4 to circumstances arising from the action of the victim in assisting or attempting to assist the prevention of crime or the saving of human life”.

13. As a matter of probability the evidence to date including the actions of the Applicant in withdrawing his application (save for the question of medical report expenses) makes it as a matter of probability very difficult for the Tribunal to determine that any crime has been committed here and that therefore the Applicant is the victim of a crime of violence.

14. In addition under Article 23 of the Scheme provides: “to qualify for compensation it will be necessary to indicate to the Tribunal that the offence giving rise to injury has been the subject of criminal proceedings or that it was reported to the Gardai without delay. However the Tribunal will have discretion to dispense with this requirement in the case of injuries resulting from offences committed before the commencement of the Scheme and in other cases where they are satisfied that all reasonable efforts were made by or on behalf of the Claimant to notify the Garda Siochana of the offence and to cooperate with them”. The Applicant has withdrawn his statement following the payment of an undisclosed in respect of compensation. This is obvious from the conversation between the Applicant’s mother and Sergeant [ ] as well as the actions of the Applicant in withdrawing the application. The matter was reported but the criminal proceedings did not progress due to the applicant withdrawing hsi statement of complaint. Clearly the applicant has not met the requirements of Article 23.

15. Finally the sum in respect of compensation clearly is deductible in the event that any award could be made which of course is not now possible in the events that happened. It is noteworthy that the quantum of such sum has not been disclosed.

16. Taking all factors into account the Application is dismissed under Article 1 and Article 23 of the scheme.

Martin G Lawlor

Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal

Date: 27 January 2023