Judgment: 2022-07-01 · Court archive

High Court awards €61,200 to schoolgirl injured in road collision

The court assessed damages only, valuing the plaintiff’s PTSD at the top of the moderate bracket and adding an uplift for her scar and other physical injuries.

High Court · [2022] IEHC 452

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court assessed damages only, valuing the plaintiff’s PTSD at the top of the moderate bracket and adding an uplift for her scar and other physical injuries.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Celbridge
  • County Kildare
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

By the time of the assessment, her PTSD had abated and she was mildly symptomatic and progressing towards recovery, although some symptoms and poor school performance remained. The judge accepted that her performance had fallen from A/B grades to D grades and that she had fallen behind in her studies. However, there was no evidence from teachers that the decline was likely to continue or become permanent. The judge considered it more likely than not that she would reengage with schoolwork, while finding an appreciable risk she might not catch up.

The High Court awarded €61,200 in damages to a minor injured in a road traffic collision while walking to school in Celbridge, County Kildare. Liability was admitted; the hearing concerned assessment of damages only.

The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Coffey on 1 July 2022, records that the plaintiff was struck by a car on 10 December 2019 while crossing the road leading to St Wolstan’s Abbey. She fell onto a grass verge. The parties had agreed special damages of €1,200. The remaining issue was general damages for pain and suffering to date and into the future.

The court said the plaintiff’s dominant injury was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which acutely affected her for many months. The judgment records nightmares, flashbacks, panic attacks, sleeplessness, low mood, withdrawal from family, difficulty concentrating and reduced motivation at school. She also experienced fear of cars and of going out in the dark, and recurring thoughts of self-harm that culminated in an act of self-cutting. She received counselling and was expected to need further focused counselling.

By the time of the assessment, her PTSD had abated and she was mildly symptomatic and progressing towards recovery, although some symptoms and poor school performance remained. The judge accepted that her performance had fallen from A/B grades to D grades and that she had fallen behind in her studies. However, there was no evidence from teachers that the decline was likely to continue or become permanent. The judge considered it more likely than not that she would reengage with schoolwork, while finding an appreciable risk she might not catch up.

The plaintiff’s counsel argued that the PTSD fell between the moderate and serious guideline brackets, proposing €40,000 to €50,000. The defendant’s counsel submitted that it was moderate PTSD and proposed about €20,000. The judge classified it as moderate, finding that the agreed expert evidence did not support significant disability for the foreseeable future. He valued it at €35,000, the top of the moderate bracket, to reflect its severity in the past and educational disadvantage already suffered. He did not depart from the Personal Injuries Guidelines.

The plaintiff also had a permanent 12.5 cm by 2 cm scar on the back of her left thigh. The judge described it as a relatively minor cosmetic deficit, while recognising that she felt self-conscious and covered it even in hot weather or when swimming. Other relatively minor injuries included soft tissue injuries and a barely noticeable area of discolouration on her shin.

The court added €25,000 for the scar and other physical injuries, bringing general damages to €60,000. With the agreed €1,200 special damages, judgment was for €61,200. The judgment does not assess liability, which had been admitted.

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