header-logo header-logo

13 March 2024
Issue: 8063 / Categories: Legal News , Compensation , Criminal , In Court
printer mail-detail

Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority: ‘double recovery’ ruling

CICA may reclaim the award that was given to the child of a domestic abuse victim

Criminal injuries compensation must only be repaid where there is ‘double recovery’, the Court of Appeal has held.

In R (AXO, a Child, by her litigation friend JXO) v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) [2024] EWCA Civ 226, the appellant’s mother was subjected to domestic abuse over a long period. State agencies were aware and were involved in trying to protect the mother, but failed to do so. In 2011, when the appellant was five years old, her mother was murdered by the ex-partner.

In 2012, the appellant received £5,500 for bereavement, and £20,000 for loss of parental services, from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). She brought civil proceedings against the state agencies (police, social services and probation) alleging breaches of her human rights, with the claim settling in 2019 for £15,000 (£10,000 for breach of her Art 2 rights and £5,000 for Art 3).

However, CICA then tried to claim back its award.

The appellant contended that CICA’s attempt to do so was unlawful as it was an ultra vires use of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995 and breached her rights under Arts 2 and 13 of the European Convention.

The Court of Appeal considered the meaning of para 49(1) of the 2008 Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, which requires repayment if the person receives payment from another ‘in respect of the same injury’.

Giving the lead judgment, Lady Justice Whipple held the 2008 scheme allows CICA to reclaim an award ‘only where there would otherwise be double recovery’. There was no double recovery in relation to the award for lost parental services, but there would be double recovery in respect of the bereavement award.

Whipple LJ said: ‘It is therefore open to CICA to demand repayment of £5,500 (the amount of the bereavement award) from the £10,000 [human rights damages].’

Issue: 8063 / Categories: Legal News , Compensation , Criminal , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll