The High Court has approved a proposed settlement of a fatal injuries claim arising from allegations about the review of a 2010 CervicalCheck smear test, ordering that €4,000 for each of three minor grandchildren be paid into court and held until they turn 18.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Garrett Simons on 18 July 2022, addressed whether the court could approve a settlement where the claim had been brought before the CervicalCheck Tribunal but had not proceeded as High Court litigation. The court held that it had an implicit jurisdiction to consider the settlement, given its supervisory role under the CervicalCheck Tribunal Act 2019.
The deceased was diagnosed with cervical carcinoma in January 2014 and died in October of that year. Her family alleged that the review of a smear test taken in September 2010 was negligent and failed to detect a high-grade abnormal cell reading. Those allegations were not findings in this settlement approval judgment.
Two daughters brought a claim on behalf of all statutory dependants to the CervicalCheck Tribunal in April 2021. After mediation in November 2021, they reached a settlement with Clinical Pathology Laboratories Inc. The claim against the Health Service Executive and Medlab Pathology Limited is to be struck out with no order.
The settlement includes compensation for financial dependency for three of the deceased’s adult children and €35,000 for mental distress, the statutory maximum. No financial dependency claim was made for the grandchildren. The agreement proposed €4,000 for each of the five grandchildren, with the remainder of the €35,000 divided among three adult children.
The judge said court approval was required only in relation to the interests of an absent adult son and the three grandchildren under 18. The family had lost contact with the son for more than 18 years. The judge was satisfied that reasonable efforts had been made to contact him and that the agreement did not adversely affect his interests. The surviving siblings had waived claims, while no solatium claim was advanced on behalf of a sibling who died after the tribunal claim was submitted.
The court found that the proposed allocation properly protected the minor grandchildren’s interests and approved the settlement to that extent. The adult children’s financial dependency claims did not require approval because they had legal capacity to accept or reject their own shares. The claimants’ legal costs are payable by Clinical Pathology Laboratories Inc.; if the amount is not agreed, it is to be measured under Part 10 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015.