Murray -v- Budds & ors [2015] IECA 269 (19 November 2015)

Murray -v- Budds & ors [2015] IECA 269 (19 November 2015)

The permitted claim is solely in tort for personal injury, specifically mental distress, and is statute-barred under the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 1991. Damages for worry and stress absent recognised psychiatric injury are not recoverable in tort. Clark J. erred in allowing amendment to pleadings for a claim that is statute-barred and not legally sustainable.

Citation
[2015] IECA 269
Parties
Plaintiff: Martin Murray; Defendant: Conan Budds; Defendant: Anthony T. Hanahoe; Defendant: Terence Hanahoe; Defendant: Michael E. Hanahoe trading as Michael E. Hanahoe Solicitors
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed, amendment set aside
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Mental Distress Damages, Statute Barred Claims, Amendment of Pleadings
Professional Negligence Contract Law Tort Law Statute of Limitations Abuse of Process Collateral Attack Mental Distress Damages Statute Barred Claims +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Murray

Plaintiff

Conan Budds

Defendant

Anthony T. Hanahoe

Defendant

Terence Hanahoe

Defendant

Michael E. Hanahoe trading as Michael E. Hanahoe Solicitors

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim for damages for worry and stress in the absence of recognised psychiatric injury is recoverable in tort or contract against solicitors
  2. 2 Whether the permitted claim is statute-barred under the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 1991
  3. 3 Whether Clark J. erred in allowing amendment to pleadings for a claim that is statute-barred

Ratio Decidendi

The permitted claim is solely in tort for personal injury, specifically mental distress, and is statute-barred under the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 1991. Damages for worry and stress absent recognised psychiatric injury are not recoverable in tort. Clark J. erred in allowing amendment to pleadings for a claim that is statute-barred and not legally sustainable.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, amendment set aside

Orders

  • The appeal by the defendants is allowed.
  • The order of Clark J. permitting amendment to the plaintiff’s claim is vacated.