The High Court has ruled that Cieran Farrell’s personal injury proceedings against the Board of Management of St Kevin’s CBS Arklow were not barred by the limitation period.
Mr Justice Barrett delivered the judgment on 28 February 2014. The issue before him was whether Mr Farrell’s personal injuries action, begun by summons on 20 December 2012, had been brought in time. The court decided it had not been barred; the judgment did not determine the underlying injury claim.
Mr Farrell was injured on 5 December 2007 when, as he was leaving an examination hall at St Kevin’s CBS, a fellow student threw a pen at him. He was a minor at the time. The judgment said the two-year limitation period began when he reached majority on 6 February 2010.
Mr Farrell applied to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board on 19 December 2011. Under section 50 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003, the period from the application until six months after an authorisation is issued is disregarded when calculating the limitation period. The judgment said that when time stopped, Mr Farrell had one month and 19 days left to start proceedings.
The Board issued an authorisation dated 11 January 2012, naming the respondent as “St. Kevin’s CBS”. In August 2012, Mr Farrell’s solicitors asked the Board to issue a further authorisation naming the defendant as the Board of Management of St Kevin’s CBS Arklow. The Board sent an amended authorisation with a letter dated 14 November 2012. The amended document retained the original 11 January date.
The Board argued that 11 January was the relevant issue date, making the proceedings deadline 30 August 2012. Mr Farrell argued that the authorisation empowering him to proceed against the correctly named defendant was issued when it was sent on 14 November, leaving time to bring his action.
Relying on earlier decisions concerning when Personal Injuries Assessment Board documents are treated as issued, Mr Justice Barrett held that the relevant date was 14 November 2012, when the authorisation naming the defendant was sent. He concluded that the proceedings commenced on 20 December 2012 did not stand barred under the Statute of Limitations 1957, as amended.