The High Court has upheld the dismissal of a woman’s personal injury claim arising from a 2018 collision on the Donore Road in Drogheda and ordered her to pay the defendants’ costs of the appeal. The Circuit Court had dismissed the claim and awarded costs to the defendants.
The appeal turned on conflicting accounts of how the vehicles collided. The plaintiff said she was overtaking a van driven by John Fynes when he moved into her car. Fynes said he was travelling ahead of her, indicating a right turn into an industrial estate, when her car struck the van as she overtook.
Justice Twomey said both accounts were plausible in light of the engineering evidence, but identified differences in the plaintiff’s account. In the Circuit Court and to her engineer, she had said she was “almost passed” the van when the collision happened. Her engineer accepted that the vehicle damage was inconsistent with that account. On appeal, she said she was near the back of the van at impact, which the engineer considered consistent with the damage. The judge said her recollection had to be treated with considerable caution.
The judgment also addressed two consultant reports obtained after the plaintiff’s GP had advised that specialist reports were not needed. The GP’s 2018 report said the plaintiff was expected to recover within three to six months. The plaintiff testified that she had recovered by September 2018, but later saw a psychiatrist and an orthopaedic surgeon in 2020 and 2021. The judge said the reports largely repeated the plaintiff’s account and that no weight should be attached to them, as the consultations had no medical basis and appeared to have been arranged for legal reasons. He said this was one factor affecting her credibility, alongside the inconsistencies in her account.
The court also noted that the plaintiff told both consultants she had no previous accidents, while court materials showed she had been in another road traffic accident four months before the collision at issue. The judgment said this further called her credibility into question.
Justice Twomey found Fynes’s account more credible and affirmed the Circuit Court decision. He awarded the defendants their High Court costs as well as the Circuit Court costs already ordered. The judgment records that the plaintiff’s counsel asked the court not to award appeal costs against her, citing her financial circumstances; the request was refused.