The High Court has allowed a personal injury appeal arising from a 2017 road collision, awarding the plaintiff €25,000 in general damages and proposing a further €397 in special damages, subject to confirmation. It refused his request for aggravated damages over an allegation in the defence that he deliberately caused the crash. The court left the separate question of costs for further submissions.
The case was an appeal from the Circuit Court’s dismissal of the claim. By the High Court hearing, the defendant had conceded liability, so the appeal proceeded only as an assessment of damages. The court heard evidence from the plaintiff and considered three medical reports agreed by the parties.
The plaintiff said the defendant’s Volkswagen Tiguan struck his van as he was leaving the N3 near Blanchardstown. He reported neck and right shoulder pain, which affected some reaching tasks in his work maintaining bus shelters. The court relied on the most recent agreed medical report, which said his symptoms had not fully settled despite time and physiotherapy. It assessed his whiplash injury as being at the higher end of the “moderate” scale in the 2016 Book of Quantum.
The defence had alleged that the plaintiff deliberately caused the collision. The judge described that allegation as entirely unsubstantiated and regrettable. But it was not pursued at the Circuit Court hearing, the defendant declined to stand over it under cross-examination, and she later conceded liability. The judge concluded that the case did not justify aggravated damages, while reserving the costs issue for further submissions on whether costs should be assessed on a legal practitioner and client basis.
The judgment also addressed problems with the discovery documents. The plaintiff’s affidavit of discovery did not identify individual documents, and the parties had not clearly explained whether the contents of those documents were agreed as true. The court therefore declined to draw inferences from disputed or unclear records that were not among the agreed medical reports. It also ruled that the plaintiff could not recover costs for making discovery because the affidavit failed to identify the documents.