|
Headnote |
Summary of decision
Where there is evidence of conduct capable of constituting provocation on the applicant’s part, the Board may withhold an award under paragraph 6(c) of the Scheme.
Facts
The Applicant (‘W’) was involved in a violent incident with M in April 1986, having previously ‘warned him off’ seeing W’s daughter. W sought out M at a party where he believed M was seeing his daughter. He considered M had indecently assaulted his daughter. An altercation ensued. It was alleged against W that he had grabbed M’s collar and dragged him down the road, swinging a punch at him whereupon they both struggled and fell. M was prosecuted, argued self defence and was acquitted at trial, notwithstanding the evidence of W and 2 witnesses in his favour. W made an application to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board (‘the Board’), which was refused on the grounds that W had failed to satisfy the Board that he was an innocent victim of a crime of violence (paragraphs 4(a) and 6(c) of the Scheme).
Held, dismissing the application
(1) It was impossible to say that there was not available to the Board evidence capable of supporting the conclusion that there was evidence of conduct capable of constituting provocation.
(2) ‘Conduct’ as used in the Scheme was intended to include provocative behaviour.
Parts of scheme and other legislation referred to in judgment
1990 Scheme, paragraphs 4(a) and 6(c)
Representation
W Gaskell instructed by Everett & Tomlin for the Applicant
M Kent instructed by the Treasury Solicitor for the Respondent
|