||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 163 (Jun)
||Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court
||Stephen Cragg (instructed by Deighton Guedella) for the claimant.
||Jeremy Johnson (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the panel.
||13 June 2008
Compensation - Criminal injuries - Entitlement to compensation - Conduct of victim - Appeal panel finding that victim remaining in street after argument and calling reinforcements to continue argument or fight - Victim stabbed to death in street - Panel finding victim's conduct to be 'inappropriate' and refusing to make award - Whether panel giving sufficient reasons - Whether decision irrational.
In all the circumstances, the respondent panel had been entitled to refuse to make an award under the 2001 Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme in respect of A, who was stabbed to death in a fight that had broken out in the street after an argument in a house, on the basis of their findings in relation to the incident in question, namely that having left the house after the argument, A had remained in the street and had called for reinforcements to continue the argument or the fight, and that it was reasonably foreseeable that those reinforcements might be armed. Adequate reasons had been given for that conclusion.
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports