Nolan -v- Murphy [2005] IESC 17 (18 March 2005)

Nolan -v- Murphy [2005] IESC 17 (18 March 2005)

The jury's award of €600,000 was disproportionate and excessive given the range of comparable awards and the need for proportionality. The appropriate award, considering the seriousness of the injuries but not the worst-case scenario, is €350,000.

Citation
[2005] IESC 17
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Michelle Nolan; Defendant/appellant: Simon Murphy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Jury Award
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court award varied
Legal Topics
Damages for Sexual Abuse, Assessment of General Damages, Proportionality in Awards, Civil Liability for Sexual Assault, Jury Awards in Personal Injury Cases

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Nolan

Plaintiff/respondent

Simon Murphy

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Jury Award

  1. 1 What is the appropriate level of general damages for a continuum of sexual abuse culminating in rape of a teenager?
  2. 2 Was the jury's award of €600,000 excessive and disproportionate?

Ratio Decidendi

The jury's award of €600,000 was disproportionate and excessive given the range of comparable awards and the need for proportionality. The appropriate award, considering the seriousness of the injuries but not the worst-case scenario, is €350,000.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court award varied

Orders

  • Set aside the jury award of €600,000 in general damages
  • Substitute an award of €350,000 in general damages to the plaintiff