R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Thompstone
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS,LORD JUSTICE OLIVER,LORD JUSTICE ROBERT GOFF |
| Judgment Date | 02 October 1984 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1984] EWCA Civ J1002-2 |
| Docket Number | 84/0354 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 02 October 1984 |
[1984] EWCA Civ J1002-2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION (DIVISIONAL COURT
(MR. JUSTICE STEPHEN BROWN)
Royal Courts of Justice.
The Master of the Rolls
(Sir John Donaldson)
Lord Justice Oliver
and
Lord Justice Robert Goff
84/0354
MR. STEPHEN SEDLEY, Q.C. (instructed by Messrs. Sharpe Pritchard & Co., London agents for Messrs. Casson & Co. of Salford) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Thompstone.
MR. R.S. SMITH (instructed by Messrs. Sidney Torrance, London agents for Messrs. Barrington Black Austin & Co. of Leeds) appeared on behalf of the Appellant Crowe.
MR. JOHN CROWLEY, Q.C. and MR. JOHN LAWS (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board is a servant of the Crown charged by the Crown, by executive instruction, with the duty of distributing the bounty of the Crown to those who sustain personal injury directly attributable to a crime of violence or to assisting in apprehending an offender or preventing an offence. It is under a duty to act judicially and its decisions are subject to judicial review by the courts. If authority is needed for these propositions, it is to be found in Reg. v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, Ex parte Lain (1967) 2 Q.B. 864, 882 per Lord Parker C.J.
The Board was constituted in 1964 and was given executive instructions which were incorporated in or evidenced by a document which was known as "The Scheme". Those instructions have been amended from time to time and in these appeals we have been concerned with the 1979 version.
Mr. Thompstone and Mr. Crowe on separate occasions were victims of crimes of violence and suffered personal injuries. Mr. Thompstone was stabbed. Mr. Crowe received a fracture of the right leg. Neither man provoked the attack upon him. Their applications for compensation were rejected by the Board in reliance upon paragraph 6(c) of the Scheme.
That paragraph reads as follows:
"The Board may withhold or reduce compensation if they consider that
(a) the applicant has not taken, without delay, all reasonable steps to inform the police, or any other authority considered by the Board to be appropriate for the purpose, of the circumstances of the injury and to co-operate with the police or other authority in bringing the offender to justice; or
(b) the applicant has failed to give all reasonable assistance to the Board or other authority in connection with the application; or
(c) having regard to the conduct of the applicant before, during or after the events giving rise to the claim or to his character and way of life—and, in applications under paragraphs 15 and 16 below, to the character, conduct and way of life of the deceased and of the applicant—it is inappropriate that a full award, or any award at all, be granted."
In the case of Mr. Thompstone, the Board's decision was in these terms:
"On the 19 March 1980 Mr Thomas Thompstone (the applicant herein) was a victim of a crime of violence. He was assaulted by a man named Taylor and sustained a stab wound which necessitated a laparotomy being performed upon him when it was discovered that his liver had been injured. He made a full recovery."
Then it recites that his claim was rejected by the single member and that he did not accept that decision. It goes on to say:
"The hearing before three Members took place at Manchester on the 10 December 1981…The applicant gave evidence. He was shown a list of his previous convictions"—which they attached—"and he agreed that it was correct. He stated that he had not been in any trouble since his last offence in September 1979. He said that he now lived with a Mrs Freeland and they had a 13 month old child. He was last employed 3 years ago with an Engineering Company.
[His advocate] produced letters from the Probation Service which commented on [his] performance on completing a Community Service Order." It was submitted on his behalf "that the applicant's criminal record must be balanced with the fact that the applicant was the victim of an unprovoked attack. Following the Community Service Order the applicant had not been in any trouble.
In arriving at its decision the Board gave full weight to the reformed character of the applicant during the previous two years. The applicant's list of previous convictions was, however, long and included crimes of dishonesty and violence and therefore the application was rejected. The Board also stated that if the applicant were to be assaulted in the future and in the meantime the applicant had maintained his reformed character, the Board might well take another view, but at this stage it was too soon after the last conviction to make an award."
In the case of Mr. Crowe, a differently constituted Board rejected his claim, saying:
"The applicant claimed compensation in respect of personal injury sustained by him on the 2 December 1980, when he suffered a broken right leg when he was assaulted by a drinking companion who was a visitor to his home address.
The Single Member…disallowed the application under Paragraph 6(c) of the Scheme with the following comment:—
'The applicant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Cook (Rene Florence)
-
State (Keegan & Lysaght) v Stardust Victims Compensation Tribunal
...[1985] A.C. 374; [1984] 3 W.L.R. 1174; [1984] 3 All E.R. 935; [1985] I.C.R. 14. Reg. v. Criminal Injuries Board, Ex p. Thompstone [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1234; [1984] 3 All E.R. 572. Reg. v. Criminal Injuries Board, Ex p. Crowe [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1234; [1984] 3 All E.R. 572. The State (Irish Pharmaceu......
-
R v The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board and Another
...if the decision is outwith the range of decisions the Board could make in that exercise of evaluation: see R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Thompstone [1984] 1 WLR 1234. At page 1239D–E the Master of the Rolls, Sir John Donaldson, said: "In each case, although different ca......
-
R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Evans
...of Lord Lowry at 764H to 766C. I do not propose to cite from it. My attention was also drawn to the decision of R.v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Thompstone [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1234, a decision of the Court of Appeal, in particular to a passage in the judgment of Sir John Dona......
-
A transatlantic perspective on the compensation of crime victims in the United States.
...(155) British Scheme, supra note 10, [paragraph] 6(c). See Regina v. Criminal Injuries Comp. Bd., ex parte Thompstone and Crowe, [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1234; Miers, supra note 10, at 76-82 and 91-99. (156) ALASKA Stat. [sections] 18.67.080(c) (1991). See also DFL. Code Ann. tit. 11, [sections] 900......