We challenged by way of judicial review the decision of the CICA to refuse compensation to SC on the basis that his claim had been made outside of the 2 year limitation period. The circumstances of the case are that SC was violently assaulted by 2 men during the course of which he lost consciousness, sustained multiple fractures of his jaw and suffered an injury over his right eye which left him scarred. At the time of the assault he did not make any claim against the CICA. However soon after he began suffering from a series of epileptic seizures which increased in frequency and seriousness, the result of which being that he required regular admissions to hospital together with round the clock personal care.
Initially, no link was made between the seizures and the criminal injury SC sustained. However 2 years later, a specialist made this connection. SC subsequently made an application to the CICA for compensation in respect of all his injuries. This was rejected by the CICA on the basis that was out of time. SC subsequently appealed the decision to the First Tier Tribunal however this was rejected on the basis that SC did not submit his claim in relation to the significant injuries he sustained as a result of the assault and which were diagnosed at the time. Neither the CICA nor the Tribunal were prepared to separate the epilepsy from the other injuries the client sustained in order to allow the claim regarding the epilepsy to be made out of time on the basis of the late diagnosis.
Judicial review proceedings were issued in relation to the FTT decision The challenge focussed on the wording of the 2008 Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme and whether the term ‘an application’, in the context of making such in time, was in respect of any injury or could be limited to the particular injury for which compensation was sought. As this was a matter for which there was no legal precedent and, potentially one which affect other Claimants in a similar position to SC, the matter proceeded to the Court of Appeal and the later Supreme Court
