Australia, July 14 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 13:

1. The applicant applied to this Tribunal for administrative review of a Determination of Objection in relation to a restitution order that was made on 15 November 2024 by the Commissioner of Victims Rights (the respondent) under the terms of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (NSW) (the Act).

Victims support approved for the victim

2. On 11 September 2020, an Assessor approved victims support for the victim in the sum of $5,000, which represented a category C recognition payment arising from a sexual assault that occurred in NSW in January 2015.

The defendant was convicted of a relevant offence

3. Court records indicate that the applicant was arrested and charged in relation to the sexual assault of the victim and that he was subsequently sentenced in the District Court of NSW to a term of imprisonment under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).

4. The applicant appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal, but the Court dismissed the appeal.

Order for restitution

54. On 3 My 2024, the respondent issued an Order for restitution to the applicant pursuant to Part 5 of the Act, which required him to pay restitution in the amount of $5,000. This represented the full amount of victims support that was approved for the victim.

Grounds of objection and evidence in support

6. On 31 May 2024, the applicant lodged an Objection to the restitution order. He filed submissions in support of the objection, which include the following:

...My intention is to pursue vindication through the High Court once my parole period ends. Due to my financial situation, responsibilities as a full time father and ongoing psychological and medical challenges, I am unable to fulfil the restitution amount requested. However, as a mark of social conscience and procedural awareness, I propose to pay a proportionate amount of up to $300 with an emphasis that any payment is not an admission of guilt...

I am a semi-retired personal trainer and a full-time father to four children...(one of whom requires intensive home care)...My partner... and I have decided that she will focus on her career while I manage the household and perform the important roe of primary carer for our children...

My financial situation is precarious. I have five long-term personal clients, generating a maximum revenue of $430 per week, though the average is around $280. This income covers mobile phone bills, travel, food and other child related expenses, with the rest allocated to various business costs. My partner covers all utility and grocery bills. I live in my partner' rented accommodation and have o savings, super, car, other sources of income or financial assets....

7. The applicant stated that he has funds totalling about $700 in his bank account and that he and his partner have no joint assets or bank accounts. He also stated that he is suffering from psychological issues as a result of the trauma associated with his incarceration and he requires ongoing treatment with a psychologist.

8. The applicant now asserts that he is considering an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia based on fresh evidence, he is in contact with lawyers and legal aid with a view to obtaining funding for such an appeal. He also stated that whilst he could have applied for benefits upon his release, he instead chose to become a full time father and he argued that this is evidence of a practical approach that he is applying to his objection to the restitution order. He stated, relevantly:

...I am providing these insights in a genuine attempt that perhaps whomever is reading this will be able to agree that the damage that has been done to my family, in particular my children, has been notable, and that as a result of having been so cooperative with all of the individual parts of this overall process, that perhaps it's time to recognise that it's time for a greater level of consideration as to how much more one person should be put into such a distressing position even when so many irregularities occurred along the way. I understand that the system is imperfect, but I still have the responsibility to tell the truth, and this is why I must take my case to the High Court...

Since my release I have not sought governmental relief in the form of emergency payments from Centrelink or other benefits therefrom. Instead I have focused on building a loving space for my family, being the best father that I can be to all of my children, a loving, supportive partner and continuing to enthusiastically help others with their ongoing health and wellbeing issues.

Everything I earn goes back into the system. I understand that the economy is suffering and that the best thing our citizens can do under these circumstances is to spend money, not save....

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19761df946f70f3a22523e30)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.