16 year old girl awarded €255,000 in court after being involved in car accident

Beta Ray Bill

I read this article today

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/girl-injured-in-accident-that-killed-her-aunt-and-cousin-settles-case-for-255000-793884.html

I'd normally post in AH as people can rage and take a mick out of it.

But I think there is serious issue now in terms of Judges awarding outlandish sums of money to people who have been in bad accidents but have fully or near fully recovered

To sum up:
This girl was in a car crash with her Uncle, Aunt and Cousin.

The Car hit a wall, and the Aunt and Cousin died.

The Girl through her father sued her Uncle for damages:
"suffered multiple injuries and fractures and was in hospital for 34 days afterwards. He said she still suffers from headaches but otherwise has made a good physical recovery"

Mr Justice Kevin Cross awarded her €255,000.

Now I'm sorry, but that is just way to much.
The smug picture of her leaving court says it all really.

I'll be open about this, I suffered a serious injury as a result of motorcycle accident a few years ago. Far more serious than a couple of fractures, I'm still living with the ramifications of it to this day. But I would never have expected to get that amount. (Nor did I get anywhere near it.)

The Government need to legislate more on what Judges can award.
I'm no fan of insurance companies, but I'd say whoever the insurer was feels fairly shafted right about now.

But the reality is that this bill will just be passed on to policy holders or life, home, health, mortgage and motor insurance.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are the Judges completely overstepping the line?

G.

Pat Mustard

grahambo wrote: »

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are the Judges completely overstepping the line?

You have all of the details of your own injuries and you may have seen some or all of your own medical reports which described those injuries.

On the other hand, all that we have to tell us about the award is that she had multiple fractures, was in hospital for 34 days and now gets headaches sometimes.

This is very meagre information and does not refer to any medical evidence from any any medical consultant (and there is little doubt that there would have been such evidence.

It is absolutely not possible to assess any personal injury case for damages without seeing the relevant medical reports.

We have no idea how many operations that this lady underwent (or if there were any), how much pain she may have endured, what future repercussions there may be, whether she is likely to get degenerative disc disease at an early age. We have none of that information.

We also have no idea whether there were any special damages which would increased the amount of the award. if someone is rendered unable to work, there can be large claims for loss of earnings.

Also, journalists give partial and incorrect information all of the time. I was in court once when a solicitor applied to make a criminal matter peremptory on the Gardai. It was written up in the newspaper but all of the details were wrong, to include the name of the solicitor or the type of application.

lifeandtimes

As pat said you don't have the full story. She was injired, in hospital for over a month which is serious in itself and also saw her relatives die which is mentally scarring.

So the judge took all the info and made his decision based on the evidence.

When I was 6 I was walking through a well known department store and a lady staking shelves with plates didn't see me and turned around and smashed them off my eyebrow, cutting me open and I had to go to hospital to get stitches etc. My mother sued and I was awarded 3500 pounds in 1995 and wouldn't get it until I was 18.
I also have a pretty nifty scar but I'm happy with what I got.

If you want to rage that's noting compared to thishttps://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/bike-fall-in-shop-sees-girl-awarded-10-000/010516

Really Interested

grahambo wrote: »

I read this article today

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/girl-injured-in-accident-that-killed-her-aunt-and-cousin-settles-case-for-255000-793884.html

I'd normally post in AH as people can rage and take a mick out of it.

But I think there is serious issue now in terms of Judges awarding outlandish sums of money to people who have been in bad accidents but have fully or near fully recovered

To sum up:
This girl was in a car crash with her Uncle, Aunt and Cousin.

The Car hit a wall, and the Aunt and Cousin died.

The Girl through her father sued her Uncle for damages:
"suffered multiple injuries and fractures and was in hospital for 34 days afterwards. He said she still suffers from headaches but otherwise has made a good physical recovery"

Mr Justice Kevin Cross awarded her €255,000.

Now I'm sorry, but that is just way to much.
The smug picture of her leaving court says it all really.

I'll be open about this, I suffered a serious injury as a result of motorcycle accident a few years ago. Far more serious than a couple of fractures, I'm still living with the ramifications of it to this day. But I would never have expected to get that amount. (Nor did I get anywhere near it.)

The Government need to legislate more on what Judges can award.
I'm no fan of insurance companies, but I'd say whoever the insurer was feels fairly shafted right about now.

But the reality is that this bill will just be passed on to policy holders or life, home, health, mortgage and motor insurance.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but are the Judges completely overstepping the line?

G.

You did read that two persons in the crash died? Also you did read "Approving the settlement" the judge did not pick a figure out of thin air, it was a settlement offered by the Defendant! You understand why that is important.

The only reason a judge was involved is any settlement of a case where a child is the plaintiff, a judge must protect the interest of the child must agree that the settlement is in the interest of the child.

So in answer to your question, yes you did miss two things.

dudara

While I'm not going to comment on the size of the award, I do note that her aunt and her cousin died in the same crash. Physical scars aside, she surely must be dealing with some hefty emotional scars.

Really Interested

dudara wrote: »

While I'm not going to comment on the size of the award, I do note that her aunt and her cousin died in the same crash. Physical scars aside, she surely must be dealing with some hefty emotional scars.

It was not an award it was a settlement offered by the Defence. Hence why the report says "settlement" not "aweraded"

pilly

Jesus, you've crucially glossed over the fact that she saw 2 people die in the same crash.

I'm never for these big awards but in this case I agree with it. She may have recovered well but if she spent 34 days in hospital then she suffered a lot of pain and she will never recover emotionally.

I don't see a smirk on her face at all.

Is it anything to do with nationality that has you ranting about this particular case?

sbsquarepants

A month in hospital, 2 people dead - it's hardly slipping on a fúcking chicken mcnugget after a night out now is.

Sounds to me like that girl has been through hell. Am I missing something?

callaway92

'Smug look in the picture leaving the court'

Are you actually for real writing that

super_furry

Seems like you're only focusing on the physical injuries and not the mental damage that being in an accident in which two members of your family die.

Counselling and psychiatrists don't come cheap and this poor girl may need to use their services for years. That's not to mention the physical injuries which can't be healed full.

The judge had full access to all the facts and medical reports, you're jumping on a headline and joining the outrage bandwagon.

I won't even comment on "The smug picture of her leaving court says it all really."

Really Interested

callaway92 wrote: »

'Smug look in the picture leaving the court'

Are you actually for real writing that

Some people make you think is the Internet worth the amount of stupid we have to put up with. A 16 year old seriously injured in a crash, spends over a month in hospital, witnessed both Aunt and cousin die, is OFFERED money in settlement, that she can not get till 18. And in the OP's mind that child was smirking, god help us.

0ph0rce0

It says through her father she sued, Who did they sue? The Aunts husband ? Your mans brother?

Really Interested

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

It says through her father she sued, Who did they sue? The Aunts husband ? Your mans brother?

A child can not sue while a child in her own name, so a adult must be named in the proceedings. The Defendant is always named as the person who committed the negligence, but in road traffic in effect it is the insurance company, who runs the defence and pays in this case the settlement.

In a road traffic case part of the settlement/award must include a payment to the Health Service for medical care and if the person had insurance also a payment to refund VHI.

Green Peter

I think the judge might have had more facts available to them than you do. I wonder if they looked Irish and had Irish names would you care so much?

Really Interested

Green Peter wrote: »

I think the judge might have had more facts available to them than you do. I wonder if they looked Irish and had Irish names would you care so much?

Again the Judge did not decide on the amount all the judge did was agree with both legal teams that the amount offered by the defendant was in the child's best interest.

Beta Ray Bill

Ok

First of all I get it that 2 people died, and that is very tragic.
I didn't mean to sound like an insensitive prick and I apologise for that.

The use of the word smug probably wasn't the best either, I apologise for that too.
But she does have smile on her face here:


And so does her father.

Teens aren't as good and hiding their emotions/feelings.
To me, she looks v.happy

I do agree though now that some posters have mentioned it that the news article could be wrong. And that maybe all the details aren't there. I sure hope this is the case

In relation to the judge approving the settlement.
All claims settlements involving minors have to go before a judge,
The insurance companies don't want the case to go before a judge as the risk is too great.
Had it been put to the judge, it probably would have been more.

If the article is accurate, I think quarter of a million euro is insane for a few fractures, she's made a full recovery like.
I get that her Aunt and Cousin died too but I think that's a bit beside the point.
I've seen people die (Trains hitting people, Car crashes, My grandmother who was incorrectly diagnosed) It was traumatic, but never felt I was entitled to compensation.
It would different if it was your off spring, in that case it's immediate family so I would think compensation would be justified.

At the crash happened when she was 9, shes 16 now. The case has been dragged out 7 years.

Finally, she was in hospital a month. As far as I am aware that close to standard for a child involved in a car crash that suffered fractures and a head injury (They keep kids in longer as they could take a turn v quickly, an adult would have been discharged in a week)

Cases like this are becoming more and more common.
Audrey Fitzpatrick, €60,000 for stepping in small hole
Lina Misiunaite, €40,000 for slipping on a chip
The list goes on and on

This girl should have gotten compensation, that's for sure, but no where near €255,000 in my opinion.

Really Interested

grahambo wrote: »

Ok

First of all I get it that 2 people died, and that is very tragic.
I didn't mean to sound like an insensitive prick and I apologise for that.

The use of the word smug probably wasn't the best either, I apologise for that too.
But she does have smile on her face here:


And so does her father.

Teens aren't as good and hiding their emotions/feelings.
To me, she looks v.happy

I do agree though now that some posters have mentioned it that the news article could be wrong. And that maybe all the details aren't there. I sure hope this is the case

In relation to the judge approving the settlement.
All claims settlements involving minors have to go before a judge,
The insurance companies don't want the case to go before a judge as the risk is too great.
Had it been put to the judge, it probably would have been more.

If the article is accurate, I think quarter of a million euro is insane for a few fractures, she's made a full recovery like.
I get that her Aunt and Cousin died too but I think that's a bit beside the point.
I've seen people die (Trains hitting people, Car crashes, My grandmother who was incorrectly diagnosed) It was traumatic, but never felt I was entitled to compensation.
It would different if it was your off spring, in that case it's immediate family so I would think compensation would be justified.

At the crash happened when she was 9, shes 16 now. The case has been dragged out 7 years.

Finally, she was in hospital a month. As far as I am aware that close to standard for a child involved in a car crash that suffered fractures and a head injury (They keep kids in longer as they could take a turn v quickly, an adult would have been discharged in a week)

Cases like this are becoming more and more common.
Audrey Fitzpatrick, €60,000 for stepping in small hole
Lina Misiunaite, €40,000 for slipping on a chip
The list goes on and on

This girl should have gotten compensation, that's for sure, but no where near €255,000 in my opinion.

You have no idea how the 255,000 figure was arrived at. For example a plaintiff must pay the the Health Ssrvice the real cost of their emergency care and after in care cost. That could be tens of thousands. We do not know what effect this may have on future prospects, for example if the person now has difficulty in sports etc.

If you are really interested call into your local court, sit through a few cases. Hear ALL the evidence and then I promise in vast number of cases you will agree with the judge.

In relation to the photograph it is 7 years post assident, andit looks posed most people by instinct smile when they know a picture is been taken,

I personally find the OP to have been bullying of a minor based on no evidence, the girl her father and Judge attacked for no reason.

Beta Ray Bill

Really Interested wrote: »

You have no idea how the 255,000 figure was arrived at. For example a plaintiff must pay the the Health Ssrvice the real cost of their emergency care and after in care cost. That could be tens of thousands. We do not know what effect this may have on future prospects, for example if the person now has difficulty in sports etc.

True, But in saying that I suffered an injury that will affect me forever, I also had expensive hospital bils
I would never have expected €255,000

Really Interested wrote: »

If you are really interested call into your local court, sit through a few cases. Hear ALL the evidence and then I promise in vast number of cases you will agree with the judge.

Next day I have off to myself, I might actually do this.
I suppose it would be good to do.

Really Interested wrote: »

In relation to the photograph it is 7 years post assident, andit looks posed most people by instinct smile when they know a picture is been taken,

This is true too.

Really Interested wrote: »

I personally find the OP to have been bullying of a minor based on no evidence, the girl her father and Judge attacked for no reason.

I still think the claim culture is to prevalent in Ireland.

I think the "Piss Take" claims such slipping on a chip and getting 40k have raised the bar for genuine claims. IE a car crash is far more serious than slipping on a chip.

Maybe I just don't know enough about it, and sensationalist journalism is muddying the water. But at the outset, as far as I can see, the frequency of excessive amounts being awarded is increasing.

NUTLEY BOY

pilly wrote: »

Jesus, you've crucially glossed over the fact that she saw 2 people die in the same crash.

I'm never for these big awards but in this case I agree with it. She may have recovered well but if she spent 34 days in hospital then she suffered a lot of pain and she will never recover emotionally.

I don't see a smirk on her face at all.

Is it anything to do with nationality that has you ranting about this particular case?

If this case had been contested there would probably have been a reasoned written judgment detailing the ratio decidendi of the decision. We would learn something of the actual medical details and the basis on which the award was calculated. Absent that information any observations are uselessly speculative.

BTW the fact that 2 people were killed in the same car does not automatically ground the proposition that damages should be high. There are many variables that might bear on that specific issue to a greater or lesser extent.

NUTLEY BOY

grahambo wrote: »

SNIP I think the "Piss Take" claims such slipping on a chip and getting 40k have raised the bar for genuine claims. IE a car crash is far more serious than slipping on a chip. SNIP .

If the defendants have been negligent and that has been the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries €40k might be perfectly reasonable on the medical evidence. The fact that you are in a car crash does not automatically mean that you may be worse off. It all turns on the specifics of each case.

Robbo

grahambo wrote: »

At the crash happened when she was 9, shes 16 now. The case has been dragged out 7 years.

Very often when minors are involved, a "wait and see" approach is taken, often by mutual consent. For example, parties will want to see how the child's development and education are progressing in light of the injuries before finality is brought to the matter.

grahambo wrote: »

Audrey Fitzpatrick, €60,000 for stepping in small hole

She wasn't awarded €60,000. It's a common trick subeditors use to fuel outrage on "compo culture" stories.

She took a claim in the Circuit Court, where the maximum permissible award is €60,000 for a personal injury. In reality it would have settled for far less.

NUTLEY BOY

Robbo wrote: »

Very often when minors are involved, a "wait and see" approach is taken, often by mutual consent. For example, parties will want to see how the child's development and education are progressing in light of the injuries before finality is brought to the matter.

She wasn't awarded €60,000. It's a common trick subeditors use to fuel outrage on "compo culture" stories.

She took a claim in the Circuit Court, where the maximum permissible award is €60,000 for a personal injury. In reality it would have settled for far less.

2 quick points on this as it can confuse people.

If a case starts life in the High Court and it is remitted to the Circuit Court the CC should have unlimited jurisdiction.

Can the parties to a particular civil action in the Circuit Court agree mutually to an increased jurisdiction ?

johnnyskeleton

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

2 quick points on this as it can confuse people.

If a case starts life in the High Court and it is remitted to the Circuit Court the CC should have unlimited jurisdiction.

Can the parties to a particular civil action in the Circuit Court agree mutually to an increased jurisdiction ?

They can agree to unlimited jurisdiction in the circuit court but they cant agree to any limited jurisdiction over the statutory limits.