The High Court has found that a mediator’s €990,000 award to a young man with narcolepsy and cataplexy did not fall outside the range of what was reasonably open to the mediator. The court said the award should not be interfered with on the application before it, while preserving the parties’ right to appeal under their settlement agreement.
The plaintiff, Benjamin Blackwell, is identified in the judgment as a minor suing through his mother and next friend, Natalie Blackwell. He was born in October 2004. The judgment says he has narcolepsy and cataplexy, allegedly resulting from injections he received as a young child to prevent the spread of a perceived pandemic. Justice Kevin Cross accepted the seriousness of his condition.
The case was the first of at least 80 High Court actions involving alleged narcolepsy from the same alleged source. The parties negotiated a group settlement under which each case would generally receive 50% of its gross value, with additional benefits. The High Court approved the liability settlement in November 2020. In this case, the mediator assessed the gross value at €1.98 million; after the agreed 50% reduction, the award was €990,000, excluding a separate €25,000 payment for accepting the offer within the specified period.
The plaintiff’s advisers challenged the mediator’s figures for general damages, loss of earnings and future care. They sought €400,000 rather than €350,000 for general damages, a higher loss-of-earnings figure, and €689,900 for future care rather than €400,000. The defendants had proposed €114,000 for future care.
Justice Cross said this was not an application under section 63 to have a party’s lodgement or offer ruled on. It concerned an expert mediator’s award under a court-approved agreement, which provided for an appeal to a retired judge. He said the agreement’s normal process should generally be followed, but heard this application because the defendants did not dispute jurisdiction and the case was the first to go through the process.
Applying the agreement’s test, the judge found none of the challenged figures outside the range reasonably open to the mediator. He said the mediator could reasonably allow €350,000 in general damages, apply a 15% reduction to the gross loss-of-earnings figure, and assess future care at €400,000. He concluded that the award should not be interfered with.
The judgment did not record a final order disposing of the application. Justice Cross said he would await counsel’s submissions on how to proceed. He also said the decision did not limit the retired judge’s jurisdiction on any appeal.