Legal Method Skills & Reasoning - Coursework Example

Consequently, her application for review of CICA’s decision by the First Tier Tribunal - Social Entitlement Chamber, and the decision held by the Upper Tribunal -Administrative Appeals Chamber is refused on the grounds that, CICA’s decision was in conformity with the requirements of s.20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 18612. There are, therefore, three principal issues before the Court of Appeal. The first issue is an interpretation of s.20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 18613.

The second issue is the determination of whether psychiatric illness may constitute bodily harm within the meaning of the section 20 and section 474. The third issue is for the court to decide whether, with the provisions of The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2001, psychiatric illness is deemed a mental injury and whether Petal’s injury fall under the qualifications of mental for which award of compensation was warranted5. In giving its judgment, CICA stated “Petal’s application for compensation is declined because that her injury was not attributable to a ‘crime of violence’ and, in any event, her injury was not a mental injury for which compensation could be paid.

” Facts The facts of Petal’s case are well set out in the reported judgment of CICA; therefore, I would only offer a brief and short description of the facts. Orlando Fiction and Petal Agatha Scissor, a 20 year old student at UEA, met through an online dating service. They started dating and soon were involved in a sexual encounter, had unprotected sex-without a condom-, on their very first date. At the time, Petal nothing about her partner, only that he had working in South Africa and had just returned to England.

Orlando Fiction and Petal Agatha Scissor had multiple, frequent unprotected. Orlando, months later, died in a road accident. Through Orlando’s mother-who she met at Orlando’s funeral-Petal learned that Orlando had been HIV positive and was not under antiretroviral drugs. After six months of medical tests, it was conclusively determined that Petal was not HIV infected. This experience resulted in Petal suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, which became severe and eventually she ended up in a psychiatric hospital.

On a solicitor’s advice, she applied for compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority on the basis of the provisions under the Compensation Scheme 20016. Her application was refused on the basis that her injury were not as a result of a crime of violence7 and that her psychiatric illness did not constitute a mental injury for which compensation is warranted8. She later appealed against this decision to the First Tier Tribunal arguing that Orlando had committed an offence under s.

20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861; this appeal was, however, dismissed, with the tribunal upholding CICA’s decision asserting that, Petal’