Foilsiú
51758 (22 August 2022)
Ó Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Foilsithe
An t-eolas is déanaí
Teanga: Níl leagan Gaeilge den mhír seo ar fáil.
Ó Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
Foilsithe
An t-eolas is déanaí
Teanga: Níl leagan Gaeilge den mhír seo ar fáil.
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: 51758
Date of incident: [ ]
Date of application: [ ] (received by the Tribunal [ ] )
Decision outcome: The application is refused under para 21.
1. Mr [ ] (‘the applicant’) has made a claim for compensation under the Scheme of Compensation for Personal Injuries Criminally Inflicted (‘the Scheme’).
2. In his application form, dated [ ], the applicant stated that he had suffered injury as a result of being assaulted in [ ] on [ ]. The applicant stated that he had sustained a fractured jaw and was treated as a hospital in-patient and, subsequent to his discharge from hospital, by his GP. The applicant sought reimbursement of his medical expenses.
3. A report from An Garda Síochána, dated [ ], was contained on file. The report confirmed that the incident occurred at approximately 11.45pm on the date in question, in the vicinity of the [ ] take-away, [ ]. It was stated that, as the applicant was exiting the take-away, he was confronted and assaulted with an iron bar by a named offender. As the applicant was making his way to a car after this assault, it was stated that he was punched by another offender, thereby sustaining the injuries to his jaw. The report confirmed that criminal proceedings had been initiated (without naming those against whom the prosecution had been taken) and that no compensation had been paid, at the time of the report, to the applicant.
4. The applicant was written to by the Tribunal to request information in support of his claim, to include original receipts and out of pocket expenses. No response to the correspondence having been received, on [ ], the Tribunal wrote to the applicant to advise that unless the outstanding information was provided on or before [ ], the file would be sent to a Member for decision.
5. No response to the letter was received by the Tribunal from the applicant.
6. The applicant’s application for compensation was received by the Tribunal on [ ].
7. Paragraph 21 of the Scheme states:
‘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.’
8. As can be seen, the application was required to have been made to the Tribunal by the applicant promptly and not less than three months from the date of the incident. A claim that is submitted outside the three-month time limit can only be admitted to the Scheme if the Tribunal considers that the circumstances which resulted in the late submission of the application justify exceptional treatment.
9. In this instance, the application form ought to have been lodged with the Tribunal no later than by [ ]. In the event, the application form was received by the Tribunal [ ]. As such, it was lodged approximately seven months’ late.
10. At Section 2(f) of the application form, the applicant set out his reasons for the late submission of his claim form. In summary, the applicant stated that it took in excess of three months before anyone was charged for the assault allegedly perpetrated upon him. Further, the applicant stated that as neither he nor the alleged perpetrators were in employment, there was no prospect of a recovery of his medical expenses other than by recourse to the Scheme.
11. Having carefully considered the matter, which included the applicant’s explanation at Section 2(f) of the application form, the Tribunal could identify no circumstances justifying exceptional treatment which would permit the exercise of its discretion in favour of admitting the application under the Scheme.
12. The Tribunal therefore refused to admit the application under paragraph 21 of the Scheme.
13. For the avoidance of doubt, had the application been admitted under the exceptional treatment provision contained in paragraph 21, the application would have been refused under paragraph 11 of the Scheme on the basis that the applicant had failed to provide all reasonable assistance to the Tribunal in the furtherance of his claim.
14. NA
15. NA
16. NA
17. Nil.
Conor Heaney
Chairperson, Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal
22 August 2022