The Supreme Court has reduced by almost half a damages award made to Sharon Cawley after she braked suddenly to avoid a sink which fell from a trailer on the road.
Ms Cawley had been awarded £25,301 by the High Court in a road traffic personal injuries action against Joseph Foley and Rose Foley. The defendants appealed, disputing whether the incident could have caused injury and arguing that the damages were too high.
The incident occurred on 13 November 1999 at St. Joachum's Terrace. Ms Cawley was driving with her three children behind a vehicle towing a trailer when a door or flap opened and a sink, or part of one, fell onto the road. She said she braked severely to avoid it.
The defendants did not dispute that allowing the sink to fall from the trailer was negligent. Their case focused on whether the braking could have caused Ms Cawley’s alleged injuries. Engineering evidence questioned her estimates of speed and stopping distance.
Mr Justice Geoghegan, delivering the Supreme Court judgment, held that the High Court judge was entitled to accept Ms Cawley’s basic account. The trial judge could regard her estimates of speed and distance as inaccurate while still accepting that she had to brake suddenly and suffered some injury as a result.
The Supreme Court also rejected the defendants’ argument that the lack of detailed findings required a new trial. Although more precise findings would have been desirable, the court said it was sufficiently clear that the High Court had accepted the central facts of Ms Cawley’s account.
The damages award was a different matter. The High Court had found that Ms Cawley had no significant physical injury, that some symptoms may have pre-dated the incident and that she had suffered less than she claimed.
The Supreme Court therefore held that £25,000 in general damages was wholly excessive. It substituted £12,500 general damages, leaving £301 special damages unchanged, for a total award of £12,801.