The High Court has dismissed a personal injury action brought by a guest who fell from a hotel bedroom window in Kinsale, after finding that he knowingly exaggerated the extent of his disabilities to support his damages claim.
Mr Justice Bernard Barton’s judgment, delivered on 11 December 2015, found that the plaintiff, Jason Platt, fell from an open window at The Old Bank House shortly after 11pm on 15 February 2009. He suffered serious injuries. The court rejected the defendants’ allegation that he had jumped, finding they had not proved that allegation on the balance of probabilities.
The court accepted engineering evidence that the bedroom window was unsafe. Its low sill could be used as a seat, the window sashes opened fully, and there was no safety bar or opening restriction. The first defendant, OBH Luxury Accommodation Limited, was found liable in negligence and for breach of statutory duties as occupier and hotel proprietor. The court attributed 60% of responsibility to the company and 40% to the plaintiff, citing his decision to sit at the open window while smoking after drinking.
However, the court also considered the defendants’ application to dismiss the claim under section 26 of the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004. Surveillance footage recorded the plaintiff walking, shopping and driving without a wheelchair or crutches on multiple occasions between March 2014 and March 2015. The judge found that his reports to medical and rehabilitation experts portrayed a much greater level of disability than the footage showed.
The judge concluded that the plaintiff knew his presentation was grossly exaggerated and that his April 2015 affidavit verifying a claim for special damages and future losses of £1,493,103.13 was dishonest within the meaning of section 26. The court also found that he knowingly gave materially false or misleading evidence at trial about his ability to walk and use his right leg. It rejected his explanation that the discrepancies reflected an honest belief about his condition.
Although the court recognised that dismissal would deprive the plaintiff of compensation for serious injuries, it found no exceptional circumstances establishing that dismissal would cause an injustice under section 26. It therefore dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. The proceedings against the second defendant, Ciaran Fitzgerald, were also dismissed because the court found no evidence that he owned or occupied the premises or was negligent. The judgment did not award damages.