Judgment: 2001-07-25 · Court archive

Supreme Court upholds £190,000 damages award after Waterford road crash

Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Keith Pethe
  • Peter McDonagh
  • Motor Insurers Bureau of Ireland
  • Mr Justice Francis D Murphy
What

Supreme Court upholds £190,000 damages award after Waterford road crash

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Tramore Road outside Waterford
  • Waterford
  • High Court
  • Supreme Court
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 2 September 1996

    Keith Pethe was driving on 2 September 1996 when his car collided with an oncoming van travelling at high speed. Liability was admitted by the defendants, Peter McDonagh and the Motor Insurers Bureau of Ireland, and an allegation of contributory negligence was withdrawn before the High Court hearing.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Francis D Murphy held that an employee was entitled to assume that tax had been deducted or provided for by the employer. The High Court was therefore entitled to treat Pethe’s payments as net income when calculating his loss of earnings.

The Supreme Court has upheld a £190,000 damages award to a restaurant manager who suffered severe injuries in a road crash on the Tramore Road outside Waterford.

Keith Pethe was driving on 2 September 1996 when his car collided with an oncoming van travelling at high speed. Liability was admitted by the defendants, Peter McDonagh and the Motor Insurers Bureau of Ireland, and an allegation of contributory negligence was withdrawn before the High Court hearing.

The High Court awarded Pethe £190,000. This comprised £15,000 in agreed special damages, £85,000 in general damages for pain and suffering to the date of trial, £30,000 for future general damages and £60,000 for loss of earnings.

The defendants appealed the awards for past general damages and earnings.

Before the accident, Pethe managed Pisa Pizza in Waterford. He said he was paid a basic amount per shift plus a bonus linked to restaurant sales. The available records suggested annual basic remuneration of about £11,500, with additional bonus income. A dispute arose over whether those payments were gross or net of income tax.

Mr Justice Francis D Murphy held that an employee was entitled to assume that tax had been deducted or provided for by the employer. The High Court was therefore entitled to treat Pethe’s payments as net income when calculating his loss of earnings.

The Supreme Court also declined to interfere with the damages for his injuries. Pethe suffered major fractures to his right femur and tibia, underwent seven operations before trial and faced another procedure. His right leg was shortened by almost two centimetres, affecting his gait. He also suffered dental and hand injuries, extensive scarring and psychological effects.

The court accepted that the £85,000 award for past pain and suffering was generous but not excessive. It noted that the £30,000 future award could be regarded as modest. Taken together, the £115,000 general damages award was reasonable.

The appeal was dismissed and the High Court order affirmed.

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