Clarke v O'Gorman [2014] IESC 72 (30 July 2014)

Clarke v O'Gorman [2014] IESC 72 (30 July 2014)

A claim for damages for personal injuries arising from sexual assault or trespass to the person is captured by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 and requires PIAB authorisation before litigation. However, the absence of such authorisation does not deprive the court of jurisdiction; it is a procedural bar that must be pleaded by the defendant. The High Court erred in striking out the proceedings for want of jurisdiction.

Citation
[2014] IESC 72
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Clarke; Defendant/respondent: O'Gorman
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal (personal Injuries) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside.
Legal Topics
Personal Injuries, Sexual Assault, Jurisdiction, Statutory Interpretation, PIAB Authorisation, Trespass to the Person
Tort Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Personal Injuries Sexual Assault Jurisdiction Statutory Interpretation PIAB Authorisation +1 more

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clarke

Plaintiff/appellant

O'Gorman

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (personal Injuries) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim for damages for sexual assault/trespass to the person is captured by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 and requires PIAB authorisation before litigation.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of PIAB authorisation deprives the court of jurisdiction or is a procedural bar.

Ratio Decidendi

A claim for damages for personal injuries arising from sexual assault or trespass to the person is captured by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 and requires PIAB authorisation before litigation. However, the absence of such authorisation does not deprive the court of jurisdiction; it is a procedural bar that must be pleaded by the defendant. The High Court erred in striking out the proceedings for want of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside.

Orders

  • High Court order striking out proceedings set aside.
  • Matter remitted for further proceedings consistent with this judgment.