Re An Application Under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1983 and Rose De Marco [1995] ACTSC 33 (13 April 1995)

SUPREME COURT OF THE ACT

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER THE CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ACT
1983 AND ROSE DE MARCO
No. CIC254 OF 1994
Number of pages - 2
Criminal Injuries Compensation - Traumatic Stress Disorder

COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
MASTER A HOGAN

CATCHWORDS

Criminal Injuries Compensation - Assessment - Victim of armed robbery - Post Traumatic Stress Disorder - No issue of principle.

HEARING

CANBERRA, 6 April 1995
13:4:1995

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Z Gabriel

Instructing Solicitors: Sneddon Hall and Gallop

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Henry

Instructing Solicitors: ACT Government Solicitor

ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Compensation be awarded to the applicant in the sum of $15,557.00

DECISION

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

2. On 14 June 1994 the applicant, who with her husband owns the Festival Supermarket at Florey, was robbed at knifepoint by Cameron William Brown. On 9 September 1994 Brown pleaded guilty before a magistrate on a charge of armed robbery, and was committed for sentence to this Court. On 17 March 1995 he was convicted but was released upon entering into a bond to be of good behaviour for 3 years, and to pay $1,980 compensation to the Festival Supermarket.

3. The applicant is a married woman, aged 37. Following the robbery she consulted Dr Veronica Goldrick who diagnosed her as suffering a severe post-traumatic stress disorder. This manifested itself in a flare-up of the applicant's pre-existing thalassaemia, resulting in severe hair loss, extreme anxiety, tension headaches and insomnia. She was referred to Sylvia Hill, psychologist, for counselling. She attended a course of five stress management counselling sessions, from which she gained some benefit.

4. Dr Goldrick and Ms Hill agree that the applicant's condition has been exacerbated by the fact that she was involved in a previous, less traumatic, hold-up two years before. Ms Hill states that the applicant's recovery is hampered by the fact that she must of necessity continue to work in her supermarket, where she is constantly reminded of the hold-ups. She continues to fear for her own safety and for that of her husband and son who also work in the supermarket.

5. For her pain and suffering I award $15,000. S.5(4) expenses have been agreed at $352.00. S.6(1) expenses are agreed at $205.00.

6. I award compensation to the applicant of $15,557.00.