Judgment: 2022-07-01 · Court archive

High Court awards €36,200 after default judgment in assault claim

The court assessed damages after the defendant failed to defend the claim and did not attend the hearing. It excluded unserved medical reports and relied on the plaintiff’s evidence.

High Court · [2022] IEHC 398

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Cathal Bourke (Plaintiff)
  • Mark Bennett (Defendant)
  • Garrett Simons (Judge)
What

The court assessed damages after the defendant failed to defend the claim and did not attend the hearing. It excluded unserved medical reports and relied on the plaintiff’s evidence.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Garrett Simons said the case was before him for an assessment of damages only. The defendant did not attend. Having considered an affidavit showing that notice of the hearing had been sent by registered post to the address Bennett had given in his notice of appearance, the judge was satisfied he knew about the hearing and chose not to participate.

The High Court awarded Cathal Bourke €36,200 in damages after assessing his personal injury claim arising from an assault. The assessment took place on 1 July 2022, after judgment had already been entered against Mark Bennett for failing to deliver a defence. The court also awarded costs on the Circuit Court scale, with High Court outlay.

Mr Justice Garrett Simons said the case was before him for an assessment of damages only. The defendant did not attend. Having considered an affidavit showing that notice of the hearing had been sent by registered post to the address Bennett had given in his notice of appearance, the judge was satisfied he knew about the hearing and chose not to participate.

The judge ruled that medical reports handed in at the hearing could not prove their contents because the experts were not giving oral evidence. He also noted the reports had not been served on Bennett, who remained entitled to challenge evidence relevant to the assessment of damages. Bourke and his legal team chose to proceed on Bourke’s evidence alone.

Bourke told the court that Bennett punched him twice at Bennett’s premises on 23 June 2017, knocking out two upper front teeth. A third tooth was removed days later on dental advice. He described difficulty eating and speaking, embarrassment, and missing two to three weeks of work while waiting for a dental plate. He said the plate remained uncomfortable and that implants had been quoted at €9,000 to €10,000.

The judge awarded €17,500 for pain and suffering arising from the loss of three teeth. He rejected the plaintiff’s counsel’s proposed approach of multiplying the single-tooth guideline figure by three, saying the overall impact and the relevant factors should be considered together. He added €7,500 in aggravated damages, citing the deliberate assault and Bourke’s evidence of social anxiety and taking prescribed antidepressants for six to nine months.

The €11,200 in special damages comprised €10,000 for proposed dental implants, €1,000 for loss of earnings, and €200 for travel. The judge limited the earnings award to the €1,000 pleaded, rather than calculating three weeks at the stated gross weekly salary of €550. He excluded €200 in miscellaneous expenses because Bourke had not explained them, and chemist expenses because they appeared to have been covered by his medical card.

The total award was €36,200. The court ordered costs against Bennett on the Circuit Court scale, with High Court outlay, because the damages fell within the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction.

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