The High Court has found two defendants liable in negligence after a rigid inflatable boat (RIB) crashed into a railway bridge near Athlone in July 2012, injuring a 16-year-old passenger. The court awarded her €69,319.86 in damages but left costs and the form of the order to be addressed after judgment.
The plaintiff was travelling on a RIB owned by Brian Corcoran and driven by Richard Coffey. She was sitting at the bow when the boat struck a bridge pillar. Coffey had admitted liability for his negligent piloting. The court heard that he had consumed about three bottles of beer before taking control; the judgment does not specify their size. The judge found he should not have been permitted to drive after drinking.
The plaintiff suffered a head injury and a blood clot on the surface of her brain. She spent nine days in hospital. The judgment records that she later made a full recovery, returned to hockey and had no identified educational setbacks or lasting neurological symptoms.
The disputed issue was whether Corcoran was also legally responsible. He owned the boat but did not give evidence at trial. His son, Robert Corcoran, also did not testify; a Garda statement from him was read in court without cross-examination. In that statement, Robert described himself as the boat’s owner and said it was registered to his father. The judge considered that evidence alongside the pleadings and the absence of evidence from both Corcorans.
The judge found that Robert had authority to use the boat and to create a lawful, gratuitous bailment by handing it to Coffey. The court did not find that Coffey was employed by Brian Corcoran or was carrying out a specific task for his benefit. Instead, it held Brian Corcoran liable for negligence through his agent in permitting the boat to be skippered by Coffey after he had consumed alcohol, creating a foreseeable risk to passengers. The judgment therefore does not impose liability on Corcoran merely because he owned the boat.
The award comprises €60,000 in general damages and €9,319.86 in agreed special damages. The judge said the parties would be heard on costs and the form of the order, particularly in light of the defendants’ notices claiming indemnity or contribution. The judgment does not set out a final costs order.