Walker v Lyons & anor [2018] IEHC 21 (16 January 2018)

Walker v Lyons & anor [2018] IEHC 21 (16 January 2018)

Neither defendant breached their duty of care; reasonable cleaning and warning systems were in place. Plaintiff ignored both verbal and visual warnings and entered a restricted area contrary to hospital rules. Plaintiff is the author of her own misfortune. No liability attaches to either defendant.

Citation
[2018] IEHC 21
Parties
Plaintiff: Lorraine Walker; First Defendant: Michael Lyons, on behalf of the Adelaide and Meath Hospital, incorporating the National Children's Hospital; Second Defendant: ISS Ireland Limited trading as ISS Facility Services
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
16 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Final Judgment
Outcome
dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Contributory Negligence, Liability of Occupiers, Liability of Independent Contractors
Tort Occupiers Liability Personal Injury Negligence Duty of Care Contributory Negligence Liability of Occupiers Liability of Independent Contractors

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lorraine Walker

Plaintiff

Michael Lyons, on behalf of the Adelaide and Meath Hospital, incorporating the National Children's Hospital

First Defendant

ISS Ireland Limited trading as ISS Facility Services

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants breached their duty of care under the Occupiers Liability Act 1995 and Safety, Health and Welfare at Work legislation
  2. 2 Whether the cleaning company and hospital failed to adequately warn or prevent access to a dangerous area
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff contributed to her own injuries by ignoring warnings and signage

Ratio Decidendi

Neither defendant breached their duty of care; reasonable cleaning and warning systems were in place. Plaintiff ignored both verbal and visual warnings and entered a restricted area contrary to hospital rules. Plaintiff is the author of her own misfortune. No liability attaches to either defendant.

Court Disposition

dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed against both defendants