In awarding more than £380,000 in compensation to the victim of a violent crime, a Tribunal has ruled that his payout should not have been reduced to take account of his own criminal convictions, which lay long in his past.
The man suffered a serious brain injury as a result of an assault in 2003. He made a claim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), which argued that his award should be cut by 75 per cent in the light of his convictions for, amongst other things, driving while disqualified and threatening behaviour.
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) noted that his most recent conviction was in 2009 and that those offences which post-dated the assault may have been connected to his brain injury. However, it ruled that his compensation should be reduced by 25 per cent and awarded him in the region of £275,000.
In upholding his challenge to that decision, the Upper Tribunal (UT) found that the FTT had erred in law and increased his award to £385,523. The UT ruled that, on a true interpretation of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, as amended by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, his past convictions ought not to have been taken into account. He should have been viewed as a rehabilitated person and no deduction from his award was therefore appropriate.
Information on applying for compensation for a criminal injury can be found on the GOV.UK website.