Interpretation of CICB Scheme
The court should not construe the scheme as if it were a statute but as a public announcement of what the Government was willing to do. This entails the court deciding what would be a reasonable and literate man’s understanding of the circumstances in which he could under the scheme be paid compensation for personal injury by a crime of violence.
Lawton LJ said: ‘The government has made funds available for the payment of compensation without being under a statutory duty to do so. It follows in my judgment, that the court should not construe this scheme as if it were a statute but as a public pronouncement of what the government was willing to do. This entails the court deciding what would be a reasonable and literate man’s understanding of the circumstances to which he could under the scheme be paid compensation for personal injury caused by a crime of violence.’ and ‘It is for the board to decide whether unlawful conduct, because of its nature, not its consequences, amounts to a crime of violence. As Lord Widgery CJ pointed out in Clowes’s case ([1977] 1 WLR 1353 at 1364) following what Lord Reid had said in Cozens v Brutus [1973] AC 854, the meaning of ‘crime of violence’ is ‘very much a jury point’. Most crimes of violence will involve the infliction or threat of force but some may not. I do not think it prudent to attempt a definition of words of ordinary usage in English which the board, as a fact finding body, have to apply to the case before them. They will recognise a crime of violence when they hear about it, even though as a matter of semantics it may be difficult to produce a definition which is not too narrow or so wide as to produce absurd consequences . .’
Lawton LJ
[1987] QB 1974
Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 1990
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board IHCS 9-Feb-2000
The petitioner appealed a refusal of his claim for compensation. He was a serving police officer injured whilst arresting an offender. He had retired on medical grounds and received pensions, which the Board found deductible from any award reducing . .
Cited – Raissi, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 22-Feb-2007
The claimant sought judicial review of a refusal to make an ex gratia payment for his imprisonment whilst successfully resisting extradition proceedings. Terrorist connections had been suggested, but the judge made an explicit finding that at no . .
Cited – Jones v First Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) CA 12-Apr-2011
The claimant had been driving his lorry. A man jumped in front of a second lorry in an apparent attempt to commit suicide. In a failed attempt to avoid the suicide, the second lorry crashed into the claimant causing catastrophic injuries. The . .
Cited – CICA v CICP/First-Tier Tribunal and TS UTAA 19-Nov-2012
TS (aged 14) was riding his bicycle. A dog ran out and chased him into the path of a car. He suffered serious injury. The dog had known aggressive characteristics. His claim to CICA was rejected on the basis that no crime of violence was involved. . .
Cited – Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) CA 3-Feb-2014
The claimant had been riding his cycle. A dog, known to be aggressive, chased him, he swerved ino the path of a car and was severely injured. His claim was rejected by the appellant saying that no crime of violence had been involved. CICA now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury
Leading Case
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.181847
