Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983 and Melody Symons [1993] ACTSC 39 (16 April 1993)

SUPREME COURT OF THE ACT

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT 1983 and MELODY SYMONS
No. CIC85 of 1990
Number of pages - 3

COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Master Hogan(1)

HEARING

CANBERRA, 11 February 1993
16:4:1993

Counsel for the Plaintiff: R. Livingstone

Instructing Solicitors: Gary Robb and Associates

Counsel for Defendant: K. J. Holmes

Instructing Solicitors: Australian Government Solicitor

ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Compensation be awarded to the applicant in the sum of $12,975.

DECISION

MASTER HOGAN This is an application for compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983.

2. On 25 February 1991 one Mark David Bennett was indicted in this Court on a charge that on 29 May 1990 he robbed Melody McCure, Nicholas Gajic and Michelle Denny of $13,170 in cash whilst he was armed with a replica Browning pistol. He was later convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 8 years with a non parole period of 5 years.

3. That robbery took place at the Dickson Branch of the Canberra Permanent Building Society.

4. On 29 May the applicant was employed as a customer service officer at that Branch. At about 11.00 am she was at her teller station when Bennett came to her counter, placed a bag on the counter and handed her a note. The note informed her that he had a gun, and demanded money. She looked up and saw him bring his hand out of the bag with a pistol in it, which he laid on the counter.

5. She took money from her drawer and put it in Bennett's bag activating an alarm as she did so. She then obeyed Bennett's instructions, and took the note to Mr Gajic, another teller. After he had put money in the bag the process was repeated at Michelle Denny's station. Bennett then ran out, and the applicant went into the rear office to inform the acting manager, Mrs Lindley. She became very upset. When she went to the office door into the customer service area she saw that Bennett had come back. She saw him demand the note back, and Mr Gajic go into the manager's office and get it for him. As soon as Bennett left she activated more alarms. The police arrived shortly afterwards.

6. After making a statement to the police and helping to count money she went with the other officers to lunch. A relief staff took over during the afternoon, but she was in a supervisory position, and had to return to the Branch to lock up, as she had the keys.

7. That night she was unable to sleep. Next morning she went to work again, to open up. After a debriefing sessions at Royal Canberra Hospital she took two days off work. Again she was unable to sleep, and kept getting flashbacks of the event.

8. The following week she returned to work where she had to endure tasteless jokes by customers about the holdup. The debriefing session had not helped her, and her perception was that management did not care very much about what had happened to them or about security.

9. After some weeks of disturbed sleep she began to suffer from severe headaches. She consulted Dr Eaton, who also noted breathing difficulties, most likely due to hysteria. He gave her counselling and prescribed medication to help her to sleep.

10. Symptoms became more severe when the Court proceedings against Bennett took place. Again she became depressed, and in July 1990 consulted the social worker at Royal Canberra Hospital for further counselling. She struggled on at work, until, in December 1990 she resigned, being fed up with the uncaring attitude of the management.

11. During January 1991 she obtained a job as a teller with a Bank, and found it a different experience. In April 1991 she consulted Dr Veness. He confirmed a diagnosis of anxiety and depression, from which she was then recovering.

12. Nevertheless, she continued to find work as a teller stressful, so she resigned from the Bank and obtained employment as a supervisor at Pacific Cinemas at Tuggeranong, where she is not in constant contact with the public and large sums of money at the same time. She also works only part time, though with extended overtime. When she moved from the Building Society to the Bank she suffered a drop in earnings. But her claim is not put forward on the basis that she should be compensated for that loss of earnings as being directly the result of the psychological injury. Nevertheless, the change from a job that she enjoyed, and the loss of the pleasure that she had taken in it, is part of the injury that she suffered.

13. In summary, her main symptoms lasted about a year, and she has now substantially recovered, though with some residual symptoms. For her pain and suffering I would award $12,000. The expenses of bringing this application were agreed at $975.00.

14. I award compensation to the applicant in the sum of $12,975.