Challenged: Woman attacks the sick reality of the new Personal Injury Guidelines

Legal Challenge

12 July 2021

A woman who suffered an undisplaced fracture in her foot after falling on a public footpath has brought a High Court case aimed at overturning the adoption of new personal injuries guidelines.

The action by Bridget Delaney follows an assessment she is entitled to general damages of €3,000 which, she claims, is insufficient. The injury should attract damages of between €18,000-34,000, she claims.

Ms Delaney claims she sustained an undisplaced fracture of the tip of a bone in her right ankle after she tripped and fell at a public footpath at Pinewood Estate, Dungarvan, Co Waterford on April 12th 2019.

She required medical treatment, physiotherapy and was given a walker boot for about four weeks.

She claims she suffered her injuries due to negligence of Waterford City and County Council.

In June 2019, her lawyers submitted a claim to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB). At the time, she claims PIAB was required, when assessing her application and making an award, to have regard to the general guidelines in the Book of Quantum to the amounts that may be awarded or assessed in personal Injury claims.

She claims the appropriate awards for her injury ranged from between €18,000 and €34,000 but, last May, PIAB assessed her as entitled to €3,000 general damages.

She rejects this assessment as insufficient. She has to pay her legal fees out of that award and it does not compensate her for the injuries she sustained, it is claimed. She claims the assessment amounted to an error in law by PIAB and was in breach of fair procedures.

She also claims the assessment was delayed because PIAB was awaiting the adoption of new guidelines on awards for personal injuries which came into force last April.

She claims the assessment of her claim was made under these new guidelines and her lawyers asked PIAB to reassess her claim under the Book of Quantum but PIAB refused to do this.

In March 2021, the Judicial Council, comprising all judges here, voted to adopt the new guidelines. She claims the requirement in the 2019 Judicial Council Act that members of the judiciary vote on the new guidelines is inconsistent with the independence of the judiciary and amounts to an impermissible delegation of the administration of justice to the council.

The adoption of the guidelines has violated her constitutional right to access to the courts, she further claims.

In intended judicial review proceedings against PIAB, the Judicial Council, Ireland and the Attorney General, Ms Delaney of Cruachan, Knockateemore, Dungarvan, Co Waterford seeks various orders and declarations.

These include orders quashing PIAB’s assessment concerning her claim, and the Judicial Council’s decision of March 6th last to adopt the new personal injuries guidelines.

She claims PIAB acted outside its powers and breached her rights to natural and constitutional justice in the manner which it assessed her claim.

She also contends the Judicial Council acted outside of its powers in adopting the personal guidelines and that provisions of the 2019 Judicial Council Act breach the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

When the matter was briefly mentioned on Monday before Mr Justice Charles Meenan by Dermot Cahill BL, for Ms Delaney, the judge said there may be an issue with him hearing any aspect of the case as he was a member of the council when the vote was taken.

All judges become members of the council once they are appointed to the bench, he said.

Counsel said one High Court judge, Ms Justice Siobhán Stack, had not been appointed when the Council voted on the guidelines, and suggested perhaps she could hear the case.

Mr Justice Meenan said he would consider that and adjourned the matter for two weeks.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Autistic cinema manager wins €12k over discrimination in roster row

An autistic cinema manager who quit when his employer was unable to guarantee him two days off in a row following a months-long dispute over rostering arrangements has secured €12,000 in compensation for disability discrimination. The complainant's wife gave evidence...

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...