Taxi driver making ‘career out of personal injury accidents’ has latest claim dismissed

wet taxi roof light during night time

27 November 2022

A taxi driver, who had obtained almost €100,000 in damages from previous incidents, seemed to be making quite a career out of personal injury claims, a judge said Thursday.

Judge James O’Donohue, throwing out Ravinder Pal Singh’s fifth claim said he had, in a new €60,000 damages claim, sworn an affidavit which was untruthful and he had to accept the consequences of that.

Barrister Conor Kearney, counsel for motorist Sean Lennon and his AXA Commercial insurer, told the Circuit Civil Court that Singh had revealed settlements totalling €68,651 in three previous claims, but had failed to reveal a fourth claim for an incident in October 2016.

Cross-examined about the amount of damages he received for the fourth undisclosed claim Singh (39), of Liffey Road, Lucan, Co Dublin, said he did not remember how much he had received but thought it was “about €11,000 or €12,000.”

Singh told the court he had been injured when Lennon’s van had rear ended him on the M50 at Sandyford. He had been off work for just over a week and said his back and neck injuries had cleared up after 18 months.

Affidavit

Mr Kearney, who appeared with Lorna Kennedy of Synnott Lawline Solicitors, said he had sworn an affidavit verifying the truth of his replies to particulars in the case but had failed to disclose the fourth previous incident and that he had told doctors his injuries had cleared up within six months.

Singh, a 6’ 2” former volleyball player, said he was not aware about signing such an affidavit.

Judge O’Donohue was told that liability had been conceded in the case and the court was being asked only to assess the extent of damages that might be due to Singh.

Dismissing his claim and directing that he pay the legal costs of Mr Lennon and his insurers, Judge O’Donohue said he had sworn an affidavit which was untruthful, and he had to accept the consequences of that.

“The court is sceptical of this individual who seems to be making quite a career out of personal injury accidents and has received a considerable amount of compensation,” Judge O’Donohue said.

He had failed to mention his fourth incident in replies to particulars and had told a doctor he had recovered in five to six months. He had also stated he had taken only a week and a half off work in an occupation that involved lifting heavy luggage at the airport which was his main area of occupation.

“The court is not impressed and dismiss the claim. He has sworn an affidavit which is not truthful and he has to accept the consequences of that,” Judge O’donohue said. He ordered costs against him.

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...