The Court of Appeal dismissed Laurence Flynn’s appeal against a High Court order that his personal injury proceedings had been compromised by a €5,500 settlement. It affirmed the High Court order, concluding that the proceedings had ended.
Flynn had sued his former employer, Finbarr Desmond, over an injury to his right index finger in September or October 2004 while he was employed as a fisherman aboard the vessel Bonne Chance off the coast of Kinsale, Co Cork. He claimed damages for personal injury and loss.
In November 2009, Flynn agreed in writing to settle the action for €5,000. The agreement said there had been no admission of liability and required him to discontinue the proceedings. It also included confidentiality terms. Flynn was not represented by a solicitor and declined the opportunity to obtain independent legal advice.
Flynn wrote to the defendant’s solicitor three days later saying he was unhappy with the amount, which he considered inadequate for the seriousness of his injury. In December, after the proposed payment increased by €500, he confirmed the settlement and filed a notice of discontinuance. The next day, he again rejected the agreement, saying he had lacked time to get legal advice and had been pressured. He returned the €5,500 in cheques.
The High Court ruled in November 2012 that the proceedings had been compromised. Flynn appealed, arguing that he had rescinded the agreement, did not fully understand it, and had not received enough weight for the seriousness of his injury. He also sought leave to introduce MRI results from August 2012.
The Court of Appeal acknowledged that medical reports indicated a significant disability affecting Flynn’s right arm and hand and his ability to work. But it also noted the risks his claim faced: the defendant had sought to have it dismissed as outside the limitation period for personal injury claims arising from maritime accidents, and the medical evidence presented difficulties in linking his later arm and hand problems to the original finger injury. The court said those uncertainties were known to Flynn when he settled.
The court concluded that settling for €5,500 could not be considered unwise and that, in the circumstances, the absence of legal advice did not undermine the agreement. It dismissed the appeal and affirmed the High Court order. The judgment does not set out a separate ruling on the requested MRI evidence.