In 2015, a 17-year-old boy rode a trail bike at 50km/h onto a field at Jubilee Park, Bourkelands, where he crashed into the girl while she was playing in an Aussie Rules game.

The impact knocked her over the boy's shoulders and she suffered a spinal fracture, fractured hip, broken ribs, and wound to the leg.

The boy was sentenced to a minimum of nine months' jail after pleading guilty to dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm, driving an unregistered and uninsured vehicle and driving without a licence.

He was also disqualified from holding a driver's licence for two years.

The applicant alleged that she was the primary victim of "an act of violence" and that she also suffered a psychological injury.

The application asked for reimbursement for the costs of physiotherapy and a recognition payment, which forms part of a victim support package and recognises the trauma suffered from a violent act.

The claim was made under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 as the girl is not eligible under the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 because her injuries are from a motor crash, which the latter act excludes.

In April 2016, NRMA Insurance, chosen by the Motor Accidents Authority to handle the case, said the "circumstances of the accident do not meet or constitute the criteria to allow claim".

Because the bike was uninsured, the claim had to be made under the uninsured vehicle section of the MACA.

However, since the incident did not happen on a road, the uninsured criterion was not met and a claim could not be made.

The assessor stated: "In reaching this finding, I do not wish to diminish the impact of the trauma or minimise its significance.

"I acknowledge that the incident caused severe, life-threatening and long-term injuries [to the girl].

"I also recognise that the actions of the young person, in riding his motorbike through a crowded oval, were reckless, irresponsible and inexcusable."

In December last year, the applicant's solicitor, Jack Thompson, requested an internal review.

"She has suffered severe, life-threatening injuries as a result of a reckless and irresponsible criminal offence and act of violence," Mr Thompson said.

"If Victims Services NSW upholds their original decision, then the victim will be denied the support and empowerment that she needs.

"It would unjustly place her in a void between the MACA, which has proven unable to assist, and the VRSA, which only turns her to a remedy that is unavailable."

In January this year, a senior assessor upheld the initial decision.

Then in February, the applicant asked for a NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal review.

The applicant argued for the tribunal to allow her victims support compensation since she is not eligible for a motor accident compensation.

However, Sijithra Sabesan, who represented Victims Services NSW, said the VRSA is "quite clear".

"If the act of violence took the form of a motor accident, the applicant is not eligible for support," the solicitor said.

In a decision last week, senior member of the tribunal Michelle Riordan upheld the senior assessor's decision.

"While I am sympathetic to the applicant's plight, I am satisfied that the senior assessor did not err in law in finding that the applicant is ineligible for victims support," Ms Riordan said.

Ms Riordan said that while the applicant is adversely impacted by a gap in the law, she is not satisfied that it can be overcome "by construing [a section in the victims support legislation] in the manner proffered by the applicant".

The tribunal made the decision based on the rule of law only as no medical evidence was tendered.