O'Brien v Keogh

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 28 July 1972
• Date: 28 July 1972
• Docket Number: [1968. No. 215 P.]
• Court: Supreme Court

O'Brien

and

Keogh

(S.C.)

Disability -Infant - Infant in custody of parent having lesser period in which to sue than infant not in such custody - Equality before the law - Personal rights - Right of action - Property rights -Statute of Limitations, 1957 (No. 6), s. 49, sub-s.2(a)(ii) - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Article40, ss. 1 and 3.

In regard to actions for damages for negligence where the damages claimed include damages for personal injuries, it is enacted by s. 11, sub-s. 2(b), of the Statute of Limitations, 1957, that (subject to s. 49) an action shall not be brought after three years from the date on which the right of action accrued. Sub-paragraph (i) of sub-s. 2(a) of s. 49 enacts that where a person is under a disability (including infancy) on the date when such right of action accrued to him then, subject to sub-paragraph (ii), the action may be brought at any time before the expiration of three years from the date when he ceased to be under the disability or died, whichever first occurs. Sub-paragraph (ii) of the same sub-section states that s. 49 of the Act of 1957 shall not apply unless the plaintiff proves that the person under the disability was not in the custody of a parent when the right of action accrued. On the 8th September, 1963, the infant plaintiff suffered personal injuries as the result of a collision on that date between the motor car of his father (the second defendant), in which the plaintiff was a passenger, and a motor car belonging to the first defendant. On that date the plaintiff was in the custody of his parents. On the 25th January, 1968, the plaintiff instituted an action in the High Court against the defendants claiming damages for his personal injuries on the ground that each defendant had driven his car negligently on the occasion of the collision. The defendants pleaded that the plaintiff's cause of action was statute-barred and the plaintiff raised the issue of the validity of s. 49, sub-s. 2 (a)(ii), of the Act of 1957 having regard to the provisions of the Constitution. An issue was set down for hearing as a preliminary point of law and, having heard submissions on...