The High Court dismissed a defendant’s application to have a personal injury claim struck out over alleged misleading evidence, then awarded the plaintiff €60,612.72 in damages for injuries from a 2013 road collision.
In a judgment delivered on 4 March 2021, Mr Justice Bernard Barton found the defendant had not proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the plaintiff knowingly gave or caused materially false or misleading evidence. He also said that, even if the section 26 application had succeeded on its merits, dismissing the claim would have caused an injustice. The application’s dismissal was not a ruling on liability: the defence had admitted liability, leaving damages to be assessed.
The dispute over the application centred on the plaintiff’s sporting activities before and after the collision. The defendant argued he had omitted or misstated information about events he completed after the accident, including a 2015 half Ironman and two Dublin City Marathons. She contended that those omissions created a misleading impression of how his injuries affected his ability to compete.
The judge accepted that the plaintiff had not volunteered details unless asked and that his approach had contributed to suspicion. But he found the evidence did not establish a deliberate intention to mislead. The plaintiff had said he attempted a triathlon after the accident, and the judge noted that the half Ironman was the only post-accident triathlon in which he competed. Race records also showed a substantial difference between his pre- and post-accident performance. The judge found he was generally straightforward and truthful.
The judgment also criticised the defendant’s failure to give her orthopaedic expert, Michael Glynn, the plaintiff’s pre-accident photographs and race times when asking him to reconsider his prognosis. Glynn had changed his opinion to say the plaintiff had fully recovered after reviewing selected post-accident material. With the fuller record, he accepted that a full recovery should have allowed a return to pre-accident performance levels. The judge said the missing comparison material was relevant to forming a balanced opinion.
The court found that the plaintiff suffered soft tissue injuries to his neck, upper back and lower back. The lower back injury resolved within about six months, but neck and upper back pain persisted, sometimes causing headaches. The judge accepted that the injuries substantially affected the plaintiff’s ability to compete at his former level in triathlons and mountain biking.
The court awarded €50,000 in general damages for pain and suffering to date and into the future. It allowed the special damages claim, including physical therapy costs, bringing the total award to €60,612.72. The judgment does not specify a separate order for interest or costs.