Judgment: 2023-09-28 · Court archive

Court of Appeal cuts cyclist’s award to €65,688 after allowing bus defendants’ appeal

The court found the medical evidence did not establish that the cyclist’s continuing widespread pain was caused by the crash. It reduced the High Court award and left costs for written submissions.

Court of Appeal · [2023] IECA 232

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court found the medical evidence did not establish that the cyclist’s continuing widespread pain was caused by the crash. It reduced the High Court award and left costs for written submissions.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Noonan on 28 September 2023, left undisturbed the High Court’s finding that the defendants were 100% liable for the June 2016 collision. The appeal concerned damages, not liability.

The Court of Appeal has reduced a cyclist’s damages award from €124,795.51 to €65,688.10 after allowing an appeal by Bus Éireann and its driver over the assessment of his injuries and expenses.

The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Noonan on 28 September 2023, left undisturbed the High Court’s finding that the defendants were 100% liable for the June 2016 collision. The appeal concerned damages, not liability.

The cyclist, a bank official, was knocked from his bicycle by a bus on Dublin’s quays near the Custom House. The medical evidence established a fracture to the radial head of his left elbow, treated in a sling, and soft tissue injuries. He also reported continuing widespread pain, fatigue and difficulty with daily activities. The High Court accepted that his chronic widespread pain followed the accident and awarded €75,000 for general damages to date, €25,000 for future damages and €24,795.51 in special damages.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal said the evidence did not establish that the continuing widespread complaints were caused by the accident. The pain specialist who treated the cyclist had described the complaints as temporally associated with the crash but accepted they had no identified physical cause and could occur without an injury. The judgment noted that the cyclist had been referred to a clinical psychologist, but no psychologist’s evidence was presented.

The court concluded that the High Court had wrongly treated the medical evidence as a conflict requiring it to choose between opposing views, and that the evidence did not support its causation finding for the ongoing complaints. It assessed general damages at €35,000 for soft tissue injuries and €20,000 for the elbow fracture, a total of €55,000.

The appeal court also rejected the High Court’s approach of allowing two thirds of the claimed special damages and all diagnostic imaging costs. It said each item had to be proved. It allowed specified expenses totalling €10,688.10, including eligible treatment and medication costs, generally applying a cut-off of 7 June 2018. It disallowed items including sports equipment, gym membership and health insurance premiums.

The court substituted a judgment for €65,688.10. It directed the defendants to file written submissions on costs within 14 days, with the plaintiff allowed 14 days to respond. The judgment did not determine costs.

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