PIAB awards leave clients ‘distinctly unimpressed’

4 November 2021

The goal of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) is to have more and more cases dealt with through their auspices, the annual Law Society litigation conference heard today (4 November).

However, Stuart Gilhooly SC told the conference that PIAB is “going about this the wrong way,” because they give awards which are far too low, in his view.

Since the formation of PIAB, there has been a big drop in litigated claims, down 7% to 31,000 in 2019, and down to 26,000 in 2020 (16% drop), Gilhooly said.

However, the acceptable rate for claims is now at 41%, down from 51% previously.

Gilhooly expressed surprise that the acceptance rate is as high as it is.

“We will see whether they continue at this level or whether they show a bit more common sense, in terms of the level of awards,” Gilhooly said.

His clients are “distinctly unimpressed” with the level of awards they receive, he added.

Low awards

Given the low level of awards, fees cannot remain as they were and must necessarily be less than previously, Gilhooly said.

“If you are getting an award of €5,000, the days of charging €1,500 for that are gone,” he said. 

PIAB is also planning to introduce a mediation system, like the operations of the Financial Ombudsman, Gilhooly said.

It’s a very unsatisfactory situation,” he said, warning that GPs may refuse to accept PIAB cases, given the low levels of pay.

Those cases may end up with specialists, he said.

Worthwhile claim 

“Clients have to leave your office feeling that their claim was worthwhile,” he added.

“It’s probably going to be a written system, but we don’t know whether it’s going to be mandatory, that if the respondent agrees to mediation, then everyone has to do it,” Gilhooly said.

Mandatory mediation will require legislation, he noted.

And the Supreme Court’s ability to hear a constitutional challenge on the matter of personal injury guidelines throws up an interesting question, given that the Judicial Council, consisting of all judges, voted in the new guidelines.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

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,...

Catriona Crumlish v Health Service Executive – Court of Appeal

On Oct. 15th, The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision against Caitriona Crumlish in her claim against Letterkenny University hospital. The plaintiff alleged that there was a failure to detect and diagnose breast cancer in May 2017 resulting in an alleged...

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...