R V CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION BOARD EX PARTE JM B-M 7th December 1998
FACTS:-
The Applicant was a nineteen year old who had suffered serious sexual abuse from their mother, father and stepfather along with six other siblings. The local authority made an application to the CICB on behalf of the Applicant, who had been taken into care. By the time the case came up for an oral hearing, the Applicant had gone to live with her mother. The Board adjourned the matter whilst they sought further evidence. Although the mother had not been convicted of any offence, the Board found that she was responsible for what had happened. They were concerned that any compensation would go to the mother.
The case mainly related to the issue of whether it was right to admit fresh evidence on an appeal. However the Court of Appeal made comments about protective measures in such cases.
HELD:-
Lord Justice Walker referred to Paragraph 9 of the Scheme.
“If in the opinion of the Board it is in the interests of the applicant (whether or not a minor or a person under an incapacity) to do so, the Board may pay the amount of any award to any trustee or trustees to hold on such trusts for the benefit of all or any of the following persons, namely the applicant and any Spouse, widow or widower, relatives and dependants of the applicant and with such provisions for their respective maintenance education and benefit and such powers and provisions for the investment and management of the fund and for remuneration of the trustee or trustees as the Board shall think fit.”
Walker LJ said that there was no doubt that the mechanism of a discretionary trust can be used to confer benefits in kind and therefore in such a way that the beneficiary could not turn them into money. However no-one should underestimate the practical problems either of efficiently and economically administering a small trust fund or of ensuring that the Applicant’s mother was excluded from any possible benefit if the Applicant were determined to try and assist her.
FACTS:-
The Applicant was a nineteen year old who had suffered serious sexual abuse from their mother, father and stepfather along with six other siblings. The local authority made an application to the CICB on behalf of the Applicant, who had been taken into care. By the time the case came up for an oral hearing, the Applicant had gone to live with her mother. The Board adjourned the matter whilst they sought further evidence. Although the mother had not been convicted of any offence, the Board found that she was responsible for what had happened. They were concerned that any compensation would go to the mother.
The case mainly related to the issue of whether it was right to admit fresh evidence on an appeal. However the Court of Appeal made comments about protective measures in such cases.
HELD:-
Lord Justice Walker referred to Paragraph 9 of the Scheme.
“If in the opinion of the Board it is in the interests of the applicant (whether or not a minor or a person under an incapacity) to do so, the Board may pay the amount of any award to any trustee or trustees to hold on such trusts for the benefit of all or any of the following persons, namely the applicant and any Spouse, widow or widower, relatives and dependants of the applicant and with such provisions for their respective maintenance education and benefit and such powers and provisions for the investment and management of the fund and for remuneration of the trustee or trustees as the Board shall think fit.”
Walker LJ said that there was no doubt that the mechanism of a discretionary trust can be used to confer benefits in kind and therefore in such a way that the beneficiary could not turn them into money. However no-one should underestimate the practical problems either of efficiently and economically administering a small trust fund or of ensuring that the Applicant’s mother was excluded from any possible benefit if the Applicant were determined to try and assist her.