Judgment: 2012-04-20 · Court archive

High Court awards €63,500 in damages after Cannes van collision

The court assessed compensation under French law for an Irish plaintiff injured in 2009, adding agreed medical expenses of €24,262.

The High Court · [2012] IEHC 177

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court assessed compensation under French law for an Irish plaintiff injured in 2009, adding agreed medical expenses of €24,262.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Cannes
  • Hospital in France
  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The fracture was initially treated without surgery. The judge said the plaintiff had been fit and physically active before the collision, regularly walking, cycling, playing tennis, hill walking and gardening. He found that the injury caused significant pain and a major reduction in those activities. As the condition worsened, necrosis developed in the femoral head, and the plaintiff underwent a total hip replacement on 5 November 2011. He recovered well from the operation but had not returned to his previous condition. The judge considered it unlikely that he would regain his former activity level, including playing tennis or safely cycling.

The High Court awarded €63,500 in damages, plus €24,262 in agreed medical expenses, to an Irish plaintiff who was struck by a van while on holiday in Cannes, France. The judgment assessed damages only: the parties agreed that the van’s driving was tortious and that the defendant insurer was liable to compensate him.

The judgment was delivered by Mr Justice O’Neill on 20 April 2012. The plaintiff, born in 1937, was struck on 16 June 2009 by a van owned by the Municipality of Cannes and driven by its servant or agent. He suffered a fracture to the head of his left femur and was taken to hospital in France before being transferred to St Vincent’s Hospital in Dublin.

The fracture was initially treated without surgery. The judge said the plaintiff had been fit and physically active before the collision, regularly walking, cycling, playing tennis, hill walking and gardening. He found that the injury caused significant pain and a major reduction in those activities. As the condition worsened, necrosis developed in the femoral head, and the plaintiff underwent a total hip replacement on 5 November 2011. He recovered well from the operation but had not returned to his previous condition. The judge considered it unlikely that he would regain his former activity level, including playing tennis or safely cycling.

French law governed the assessment because the injury occurred in France. The court heard from a French-law expert called by the defendant and considered a report from an expert commissioned by the plaintiff. The judge said their opinions showed little material difference about the French method: injuries were assessed under separate categories, with compensation selected for each. French judges commonly consult a book of previous awards, but the judge held that it was a guide rather than a binding rule. He concluded that Irish practice could inform the amounts awarded while the French method governed the assessment.

The judge increased the suggested sums for temporary disability from €6,506 to €12,000, pain and suffering from €7,800 to €15,000, loss or disruption of activities from €6,000 to €15,000, and permanent non-pecuniary loss from €14,000 to €17,500. He accepted €2,400 for the operative scar and €2,000 for sexual damage. Those heads totalled €63,500. The judgment also recorded €24,262 in agreed medical expenses. The source states the damages assessment and total; it does not set out a separate costs order.

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