Judgment: 2024-03-08 · Court archive

Court of Appeal dismisses Gerard Butler’s appeal in long-running medical negligence case

The court upheld the High Court’s damages award over a surgeon’s failure to report a risk of arthritis in Butler’s right hip. It left the separate costs issues for a later hearing.

Court of Appeal · [2024] IECA 52

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Gerard Butler (Plaintiff)
  • Brian Regan
What

The court upheld the High Court’s damages award over a surgeon’s failure to report a risk of arthritis in Butler’s right hip. It left the separate costs issues for a later hearing.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 16 February 1987

    The High Court assessed damages at IR£30,000, converted to €38,092.15, with interest from 16 February 1987. The parties had agreed special damages of €23,949.58. The judge also ordered costs at 17/19 of the amount to be taxed and ascertained.

  • 19 March 2024

    The appeal was dismissed on the grounds Butler pursued. The court did not decide the dispute over High Court costs in this judgment; it directed that the issue, along with costs of the appeal, be heard at a later listing scheduled for 19 March 2024. The judgment does not state the outcome of that costs hearing.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Butler later sued Regan, alleging that the reports failed to identify several injuries and their likely consequences, causing the earlier case to settle for too little. After a 20-day High Court trial in 2002, Mr Justice Abbott found Regan liable for failing to report the probability, or serious possibility, of severe arthritis in Butler’s right hip and a possible future hip replacement. The judge rejected the other principal injury claims, including those concerning the left hip, right knee, back and fractured sternum, and did not award damages for psychiatric injury.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Gerard Butler’s appeal against a High Court judgment that awarded him damages over a surgeon’s failure to report a risk of arthritis in his right hip before an earlier personal injury settlement.

The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Faherty on 8 March 2024, concerned proceedings arising from injuries Butler sustained in a road traffic collision in 1980. The surgeon, the late Brian Regan, had treated Butler’s orthopaedic injuries and provided medical reports for his claim against the other driver. That claim settled in 1984 for IR£85,000, plus costs.

Butler later sued Regan, alleging that the reports failed to identify several injuries and their likely consequences, causing the earlier case to settle for too little. After a 20-day High Court trial in 2002, Mr Justice Abbott found Regan liable for failing to report the probability, or serious possibility, of severe arthritis in Butler’s right hip and a possible future hip replacement. The judge rejected the other principal injury claims, including those concerning the left hip, right knee, back and fractured sternum, and did not award damages for psychiatric injury.

The High Court assessed damages at IR£30,000, converted to €38,092.15, with interest from 16 February 1987. The parties had agreed special damages of €23,949.58. The judge also ordered costs at 17/19 of the amount to be taxed and ascertained.

On appeal, Butler challenged the findings on the other injuries, the rejection of psychiatric damages, the damages calculation, claims for aggravated or exemplary damages, and the fairness of the trial. The Court of Appeal said its role in reviewing factual findings was limited and that the trial judge had evidence supporting his conclusions. It found no basis to disturb those findings and upheld the damages methodology and award.

The appeal was dismissed on the grounds Butler pursued. The court did not decide the dispute over High Court costs in this judgment; it directed that the issue, along with costs of the appeal, be heard at a later listing scheduled for 19 March 2024. The judgment does not state the outcome of that costs hearing.

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