Cawley v Foley [2001] IESC 102 (20 December 2001)

Cawley v Foley [2001] IESC 102 (20 December 2001)

It was open to the trial judge to accept the plaintiff's basic story of sudden braking and resulting injury, even if speeds and distances did not tally with scientific evidence. The absence of precise findings did not render the trial unsatisfactory. However, the damages awarded were excessive given the limited significance attached to the injuries.

Citation
[2001] IESC 102
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Sharon Cawley; Defendant/appellant: Joseph Foley; Defendant/appellant: Rose Foley
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
20 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Road Traffic Personal Injuries Claim / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; damages reduced
Legal Topics
Negligence, Damages, Causation, Duty of Care

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharon Cawley

Plaintiff/respondent

Joseph Foley

Defendant/appellant

Rose Foley

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Road Traffic Personal Injuries Claim / Appeal From High Court Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff suffered any injury in the incident
  2. 2 Whether the trial was unsatisfactory due to lack of clarity in findings
  3. 3 Whether the damages awarded were excessive

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the trial judge to accept the plaintiff's basic story of sudden braking and resulting injury, even if speeds and distances did not tally with scientific evidence. The absence of precise findings did not render the trial unsatisfactory. However, the damages awarded were excessive given the limited significance attached to the injuries.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; damages reduced

Orders

  • Substitute award of £25,301 with £12,801