The High Court has ruled that oral evidence is needed to determine when Patrick Fennell acquired knowledge relevant to the time limit for his personal injury claim against the Minister for Defence, Ireland and the Attorney General.
The defendants applied to have the claim struck out as statute barred under the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act 1991, as amended. The personal injury summons, issued on 3 July 2008, alleges workplace bullying, harassment, discrimination and stress beginning in September 1983 and continuing over a number of years. Those are allegations, not findings in this judgment.
The defendants delivered a defence in September 2009. They raised the limitation issue in an amended defence delivered in May 2013. The application was heard on affidavit evidence alone.
Fennell argued that he acquired the relevant knowledge only after receiving a report by Comdt. P. Diskin dated 14 July 2006. A letter from his solicitors dated 14 November 2007 said the report described alleged bullying, harassment and intimidation, and said he had suffered depression requiring medical attention. Fennell said the report informed him of the matters and led him to seek legal advice. The defendants disputed that account.
Justice Meenan said the court could not decide the parties’ competing positions without oral evidence. Fennell would need to give evidence about his knowledge at the relevant time; the defendants would have an opportunity to cross-examine him and any other witnesses he relied on, and to call their own evidence.
The judge ruled that Fennell’s date of knowledge must be determined through oral evidence and that he bears the burden of proving he acquired the relevant knowledge no earlier than two years before the proceedings began. The issue may be tried as a preliminary issue, with both sides entitled to call evidence.
The judgment did not decide whether the claim is statute barred or determine the underlying allegations. Justice Meenan said he would hear counsel on the consequential orders arising from the ruling.