Criminal Injuries Compensation Board: Report and Accounts for 2009.

STATES OF JERSEY

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD: REPORT AND ACCOUNTS FOR 2009

Presented to the States on 29th June 2010 by the Minister for Home Affairs

STATES GREFFE

2010   Price code: B  R.89

REPORT

1. The States, on 4th December 1990, approved a draft Act (R&O 8143, as subsequently  amended  by  R&Os 8239,  8497,  8769,  9234  and  51/2002) establishing  a  Scheme  to provide  compensation  for  victims  of  crimes  of violence to replace the Scheme set out in the Act of the States dated 12th May 1970  (R&O 5350).  Most recently,  the  States –  on 10th  September  2009 – adopted a revised Scheme which consolidated all previous amendments and incorporated  a  number  of  further  changes  recommended  by  the  Board. Article 10(a) of the 1990 Act sets out the scope of the Scheme, the essence of which is as follows –

the Board may make ex gratia payments of compensation in any case where the applicant or, in the case of an application by a spouse or dependant, the deceased –

1. sustained, in the Island or on a Jersey ship, personal injury directly attributable to a crime of violence (including arson or poisoning) or the apprehension or attempted apprehension of an offender or a suspected offender or to the prevention or attempted prevention of an offence or to the giving of help to a police officer who is engaged in any such activity, or
2. sustained personal injury directly attributable to a crime of violence (including arson or poisoning) in respect of which a court in the Island has jurisdiction by virtue of section 686 or 687 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 or such enactments as from time to time replace them.

2. In 1992, the then Defence Committee, conscious of the limitations of the 1970 Scheme (which provided for compensation only in cases where members of the public came voluntarily to the aid of another member of the public or the police and were injured in so doing), widened the scope of the Scheme to include crimes of violence generally. The 1990 Scheme came into force on 1st May 1991 in respect of injuries suffered on or after that date. Applications in respect of injuries suffered before 1st May 1991 are dealt with under the terms of the 1970 Scheme.
3. The current version of the guide to the Scheme (entitled "Victims of Crimes of Violence") incorporates all the amendments to the Scheme since its inception.
4. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board comprises Advocate C.J. Dorey (Chairman, from June 2006), Advocates R.J. Michel and L.M. Gould (former Chairmen), Advocates A.S. Regal, P. de C. Mourant and D.J. Benest – these are the members who are "advocates or solicitors of the Royal Court of not less  than  5 years'  standing" –  and  lay'  members  Mrs. B.M. Chiang, Mr. M.A. Payne,  Mrs. C.L. Jeune  and  Dr. G. Llewellin.  Advocate  P.M. Livingstone  retired  from  the  Board  during  2009.  The Minister  wishes  to record his appreciation to all members of the Board for the work they have undertaken.

5. Under  Article 15  of  the  Scheme,  the  Board  may  withhold  or  reduce compensation if it considers that –

1. the applicant has not taken all reasonable steps to inform the police;
2. the applicant has failed to give all reasonable assistance to the Board;
3. 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, it is inappropriate that a full award, or any award at all, be granted; and

furthermore, compensation will not be payable –

4. if the injury was sustained accidentally, unless the Board is satisfied  that  the  applicant  was  at  the  time  taking  an exceptional risk which was justified in all the circumstances.

6. The Board received 51 applications for the award of compensation under the 1990 Scheme during the period 1st January to 31st December 2009. Because of  the  length  of  time  it sometimes  takes  to finalize  an  award,  not  all applications are concluded in the calendar year they are received. Examples of the nature of applications and awards made in 2009 are as follows –

1. G had been drinking and watching T.V.in some staff accommodation. He fell asleep. He was awoken by somebody returning to the staff accommodation who punched him in the face several times and also smashed a mug into his face. The assailant was convicted of a grave and criminal assault. G had several cuts to his face, a deviated septum, a  fractured  nose  and  other  soft  tissue  injuries.  He  was  left  with scarring  which  was  visible  at  conversational  distances.  The  gross award of £8,200 with regard to the injuries was reduced by 97.5% in accordance with Article 15(c) of the Scheme by reason of G's several previous  convictions,  some  of  which  were  in respect  of  serious matters, and also by reason of his semi-drunken state. The net award was £205;
2. K had been in town during the course of the evening where he had been  drinking  comparatively  heavily.  Without  any  form  of provocation, and whilst in a public house, he was punched and kicked. K sustained bruising to the eyelids, the forehead, the jaw, the chest and the arm. In addition, K described ongoing symptoms of anxiety and paranoia. The Board needed medical evidence with regard to the same, but K failed to produce any such medical evidence despite such requests. Accordingly it could only make its award on the basis of the physical injuries sustained and they fell below the minimum level of damages as set out in the Scheme and thus there was a nil award;

3. M was sitting outside a public house in town when he was the subject of an unprovoked assault during which he was kicked and punched about the head and chest. M suffered fractures to both sides of his jaw and an injury to his right ear. The injury to his ear was such that M lost his hearing in that ear. An interim award of £35,000 was made with regard to the physical injuries.

8. Of  the  1,248 applications  received  since  1st  May  1991 –  1,165  had  been resolved as at 31st December 2009. Of the 83 applications in the process of resolution  as  at  the  end  of  2009,  6  related  to hearings  which  remained unresolved, 18 had received awards which included an element of interim payment and 17 others had been determined which awaited acceptance by the applicant.  A  total  of  42 applications  awaited  reports  and/or  further information.
9. Alcohol-related incidents. The Board receives many applications in which drink  has  been  a  substantial  cause  of  the  victim's  misfortune.  From information available on the 51 applications received in 2009, 26 of those (that is 51%) involved the consumption of alcohol by either the assailant or the victim, either on licensed premises or elsewhere. Many of these incidents occur in places and situations which the victims might have avoided had they been sober or not willing to run some kind of risk. In such circumstances the Board  may  make  an  award  but  only  after  looking  very  carefully  at  the circumstances to ensure that the applicant's conduct "before, during or after the events giving rise to the claim" was not such that it would be inappropriate to make a payment from public funds.
10. Appendix 1 sets out statistics relating to claims made under the Criminal Injuries  Compensation  Scheme  during  the  period  1st  January  to 31st December 2009.
11. Appendix 2(a) shows, in the form of a bar graph, the rate of applications received during 2009 (51); and Appendix 2(b) shows in tabular form month by month, the total number of applications received annually from 1999 to 2009.
12. Appendix 3 shows the range of awards made by the Board during the period 1st May 1991 to 31st December 2009.
13. Appendix 4 shows the accounts of the Board for the period 1st January to 31st  December  2009  and  for  the  years  2001  to 2008,  for  comparative purposes.
14. The Board was generally satisfied with the working of the 1990 Scheme, as amended.  For  2009, the majority  of  its  budget  was  provided  through the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund (COCF) rather than directly from the budget of the Home Affairs Department. The Board notes that there has been little  progress  in  relation  to its recommendation  made  in 2002  that  there should be an increase in the maximum award (which is currently £100,000) to £250,000 in order to bring it into line with similar awards made in respect of common law damages. It is worthy of note that, in recent years, a number of substantial awards have been made – some in the maximum sum of £100,000.

This  also  occurred  in  2009.  Had  the  Board's  recommendation  that  the maximum award payable under the Scheme be increased been implemented, it is likely that the award payable to some applicants who are presently limited to receiving £100,000 would be significantly higher. The Board is concerned that some very deserving applicants are suffering considerable hardship as a result of this failure to increase the maximum award. However, the Minister for  Home  Affairs  has  indicated  a  willingness  to  review  the  level  of  the maximum award, and the Board members will consider what information they could make available to him in order that he could carry out such a review.

APPENDIX 1 RATE OF APPLICATIONS 1ST JANUARY TO 31ST DECEMBER 2009

NOTE: The figure for the total "Amount awarded" in this Appendix does not match

the figure for the total "Compensation paid" in Appendix 4 because some awards are not paid until the following year and/or some payments relate to awards made in a preceding year.

APPENDIX 2(a)

APPENDIX 2(b)

CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD

Applications received for the period 1st January to 31st December 2009 (and comparative figures for 2000 to 2008)

APPENDIX 3

RANGE OF AWARDS 1ST MAY 1991 TO 31ST DECEMBER 2009 Total number of applications received = 1,248

Total number of applications determined = *1,165

N.B.  The lowest award (other than nil) was £149, and the highest £100,000.

(Numbers in brackets represent numbers of applications. *The 2 figures for the total number of applications determined do not match because some  applications  receive  elements  of  an  award  in  different  calendar years.)

APPENDIX 4 ACCOUNTS FOR THE PERIOD 1ST JANUARY TO 31ST DECEMBER 2009

(AND COMPARATIVE FIGURES FOR 2001 TO 2008)

Notes:  1.  From 1995, payment to members of the Board in respect of their time

spent  on  applications  has  been  made  at  a  rate  of  £50  an  hour. Comparative figures from 1996 are as follows –

2. The figure for the total "Compensation paid" in this Appendix does not match the total "Amount awarded" in Appendix 1 because some awards are not paid until the following year and/or some payments relate to awards made in a preceding year.
3. The heading "Administration" was introduced in2004, as a consequence of the decisions made during the 2004 Fundamental Spending Review process, in order to reflect the payment by the Home Affairs Department to the States Greffe  of a  sum  representing  the  cost  incurred  by the  States  Greffe  in servicing the Board's administrative needs. In 2006 and 2008, in view of the pressure upon the Home Affairs budget at the time, this cost was not passed on for those years.
4. The years 2006 and 2009saw a number ofawards being made at or near the maximum permitted under the Scheme (£100,000). This led to higher than usual  calls  on the  Scheme  and  necessitated  a  significantly  increased allocation of funding to meet the awards made in those years.