Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Papua New Guinea District Court

Wanji v Kongu [2009] PGDC 84; DC989 (19 May 2009)

DC989

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE SITTING IN ITS CIVIL JURISDICTION

DCCi 291 of 2008

BETWEEN:

MICHELLE WANJI
Complainant

AND:

STANLEY KONGU
Defendant

Madang: E Wilmot

2005: 19 May 2009

CIVIL – Case Details

Cases Cited
List Cases Chronologically

References
List Legislation In Alphabetical Order

Counsel

Name Of Lawyer, for the Complainant
Name of Lawyer, for the Defendant

2005

E Wilmot DCM: This case arises as a result of a case of domestic violence. The complainant Michelle Wanji has brought this complaint seeking the following:

Special Damages

Medical Cost K159.00

Transport Cost K20

Legal Consultation K20

Food while in town K 50

General Damages:

For pain and suffering, humiliation physical and mental anxiety and sexual abuse K5000

Cost and interest per statute

Fact

The events that led to this claim are as follows. On the 15 of September 2008, an arguments occurred between the complainant and defendant. Over this argument the defendant evidently bashed the complainant in the eye and proceeded to take a stick and assaulted the complainant.

On defence the defendant 19 11 08 raised the claim of provocation. That the complainant assaulted the defendant in the first instant and that he denied knowledge of the result of the beating.

A response to the defence was file on 25 11 08 which restated the facts in the compliant.

On 22 and 27 01 2009 two affidavits were filed. These were deposed by the defendant and the babysitter. These affidavits raised the defence of provocation. That the complainant accused the baby sitter for sleeping with the defendant and that resulted in the beating. The baby sitter Augusta Pari and Stanley Kongu.

On the 31st March 2009 the defendant filed notices to cross examine the complainant on her affidavit of 19 09 08.

On 22 April 2009 the defendant was found liable for the injuries sustained on the complainant. It was directed then by the court that if was liability was establish then on cross examination counsel must lead question as to quantum.

On 19 5 2009 the complainant was cross-examined on her affidavit on the 19th if September 2008.

It was accepted that evidence obtained in cross exam was to relate to extent of beating.

Mrs Meten led many question in cross to the complainant. In considering this i have listed the questions which I consider were relivant.

During cross Mrs Meten asked how did he punch you. In response the complainant stated with a closed fist on the fore head. When asked whether she reported the matter. She responded no, but she did report it to her boss. She was then asked did she go straight to the doctor she responded, she said she was assaulted on the 15 of September 2008 and went to see the doctor on the 17 of September 2008.

Medical evidence was brought by way of a medical report. According to the report Doctor Kawa said bruises on the left shoulder and left bicep bruises lacerations on the left eye. There is nothing on bruises on the fore head. The complainant replied he hit me I blacked out and covered my face.

In re examination complainant counsel he asked how she felt after the punch to the forehead she responded she though she would die so to protect herself she grabbed him to stop him from punching her.

The complainant showed to the court that the motion of him lifting the plant to hit her was a throwing motion, with might. That she felt pain then she blacked out. And she did consult a physician where Mr Ilaisa tendered the medical report which complainant confirms the report. When asked if it was correct un every particular Mr Meten objected and was sustained.

The Evidence.

The evidence labelled as exhibit one is a medical report. It was prepared by Dr Kawa on 17 Septembers 2008. it shows the following.

I have looked at the submissions filed by both counsel and thank them for assisting the court with them

My Finding.

I have sat and hear the witness under cross examination. And have come to this conclusion.

That there was an argument and the defendant did beat he complainant. That the beat was severe and the defendant did suffer injuries from that beating. The complainant herself state she was hit in the forehead. That caused her to black out.

The medical evidence supports only the bruising on the shoulder left biceps which is usually the result a hit to that area. I am curious as to why she did not go to the police to report the matter. It appears to be identical to the incident of 2004. In that time she said did not report the matter also. She does not allude as to why she did not do this.

I am also curious to know why she did not seek medical assistance straight after the beating. Was she so badly beaten that it required rest before attending to the treatment. I believe although the beating was sever it was not serious or life threatening. She suffered soft tissues injuries which is synonymous with being belted. I note that the beating did not require hospitalisation. She was brought in treated and released.

The Law.

The law relating to damages states that damages must be assessed to put the injuries party in the position he/she was prior to the assault.

The complainant is seeking the following damages.

• Special Damages
• Medical Cost K159.00
• Transport Cost K20
• Legal Consultation K20
• Food while in town K 50
• General Damages:
• For pain and suffering, humiliation physical and mental anxiety and sexual abuse K5000
• Cost and interest per statute
  

Damages

When looking a general damages it is a measure of personal injuries. The assessment shall be made in accordance with the standards prevailing in community and the condition of the Plaintiff at the time of injury. - Condition of plaintiff at time of injury - Defendant to take plaintiff as he finds him. Counsel for the complainant has brought the case of Paul Kumi –v- State were the genera; damages were awarded at K27000.00. I believe the principle applied in that case is relevant but in accessing it in comparison to this case that is a far more serious injury.

At the time of injury the defendant was beaten to the ground and reacted by holding the defendant to protect herself. The beating was humiliating for the defendant but apart from bruising on her face and should and arm not permanent physical scaring would remain after healing, only emotional scaring.

In say this I consider that an amount of compensation in the form of general damages will likely be K1000 being for pain and suffering.

When looking at special damages I consider the cost the complainant has incurred while treating her injuries. I award special damages to the amount claimed in the statement of claim and order K249.00.

I order interest be interest per statute.

I order the defendant to pay the complainant cost.

Lawyer for the Complainant Thomas More Ilaisa Lawyers
Lawyer for the Defendant Public Solicitor