Judgment: 2019-12-18 · Court archive

High Court awards taxi driver €69,193 after Dublin rear-end collision

The court accepted the driver’s account and found the defendant’s negligence caused injuries that included ongoing back pain. It proposed damages of €65,000 for pain and suffering, plus €4,193.82 in special damages.

High Court · [2019] IEHC 915

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Bronagh O’Hanlon (Judge)
  • Gary O’Toole
What

The court accepted the driver’s account and found the defendant’s negligence caused injuries that included ongoing back pain. It proposed damages of €65,000 for pain and suffering, plus €4,193.82 in special damages.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Cuffe Street and Cuffe Lane
  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court found that a driver’s back, neck and shoulder injuries were caused by a rear-end collision on Cuffe Street, Dublin, and proposed total damages of €69,193.82.

The High Court found that a driver’s back, neck and shoulder injuries were caused by a rear-end collision on Cuffe Street, Dublin, and proposed total damages of €69,193.82.

In a judgment delivered on 18 December 2019, Ms Justice Bronagh O’Hanlon accepted the plaintiff’s evidence that the defendant’s vehicle struck his taxi at the junction of Cuffe Street and Cuffe Lane on 11 February 2017. The judge found, on the balance of probabilities, that the collision resulted from the defendant’s unsafe driving and negligence.

The case was defended on the basis that the impact was minimal and could not have caused the injuries claimed. The plaintiff’s vehicle had limited visible damage, while the defendant’s car sustained substantially more damage and was treated as a write-off. Experts called by both sides gave evidence about the differing damage to the vehicles and the force of the collision. The judge concluded that a collision causing little visible damage to one vehicle could still injure its occupant.

The plaintiff said he had no back pain for seven years before the collision. He reported developing pain in the days afterwards, along with a burning sensation in his legs, and described limits on his walking and ability to work. Medical evidence identified spinal stenosis and degenerative changes. The plaintiff’s orthopaedic consultant, Mr Gary O’Toole, said the condition had plateaued and he did not expect improvement. A defence orthopaedic surgeon disagreed with Mr O’Toole’s view of the cause and prognosis. The judge preferred Mr O’Toole’s evidence and found that the plaintiff continued to suffer pain and loss of amenities as a result of the collision.

The court proposed €50,000 for pain and suffering to date, €15,000 for future pain and suffering, and special damages of €4,193.82, which were agreed and determined. The judgment records the proposed award; it does not state that a separate final order for payment was made.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review