Boles -v- ABP Ireland trading as ABP Cahir [2017] IECA 274 (25 October 2017)

Boles -v- ABP Ireland trading as ABP Cahir [2017] IECA 274 (25 October 2017)

The trial judge's finding that the conveyor struck the left side of the plaintiff's head was supported by credible contemporaneous evidence and should not be disturbed. However, the overall award for general damages was excessive and not proportionate to the injuries sustained, requiring a reduction. The awards for loss of earnings were supported by evidence and justified, with no failure to mitigate loss established.

Citation
[2017] IECA 274
Parties
Plaintiff / Respondent: Hany Boles; Defendant / Appellant: ABP Ireland trading as ABP Cahir
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; general damages reduced; other awards affirmed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Damages, Loss of Earnings, Mitigation of Loss, Assessment of General Damages
Tort Law Personal Injury Negligence Damages Loss of Earnings Mitigation of Loss Assessment of General Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hany Boles

Plaintiff / Respondent

ABP Ireland trading as ABP Cahir

Defendant / Appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in finding the mechanism and location of the plaintiff's injury
  2. 2 Whether the award of general damages for pain and suffering was excessive and constituted a legal error
  3. 3 Whether the awards for loss of earnings to date and into the future were excessive or unsupported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's finding that the conveyor struck the left side of the plaintiff's head was supported by credible contemporaneous evidence and should not be disturbed. However, the overall award for general damages was excessive and not proportionate to the injuries sustained, requiring a reduction. The awards for loss of earnings were supported by evidence and justified, with no failure to mitigate loss established.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; general damages reduced; other awards affirmed.

Orders

  • Award for pain and suffering to date reduced to €45,000
  • Award for future pain and suffering reduced to €15,000