Cogley (A Minor) v Foley

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Garrett Simons
• Judgment Date: 29 July 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] IEHC 459
• Year: 2022
• Court: High Court
• Docket Number: 2022 No. 585 P

In the Matter of Section 35 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003

Between

Noah Cogley (A Minor Suing Through His Father and Next Friend Keith Cogley)

Plaintiff

and

Miriam Foley

Defendant

[2022] IEHC 459

2022 No. 585 P

THE HIGH COURT

Assessment of damages – Approval – Personal injuries – Plaintiff seeking approval of assessment of damages – Whether it was open to the plaintiff to accept the previously rejected assessment of damages

Facts: An application to approve an assessment of damages made by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) came before the High Court. The assessment of damages had been made in the context of a claim for personal injuries arising out of a road traffic accident. As the claimant, Mr Cogley (the injured child), was a minor, court approval was required before the assessment of damages could become legally binding. The difficulty with the application was that the assessment of damages had already been rejected by the injured child, through his next friend, and a personal injuries action commenced before the High Court. The principal issue for determination was whether it was open to the injured child to accept the previously rejected assessment of damages.

Held by Simons J that the objective of the application before the court was to make the assessment of damages of November 2021 binding upon the parties. Simons J held that this could not be done in circumstances where an authorisation to bring legal proceedings had been issued pursuant to the claimant’s notification of his non-acceptance of the assessment. Simons J noted that an authorisation issued on 14 December 2021, following the notification, by the injured child’s solicitors, of his non-acceptance of the PIAB assessment; thereafter, the injured child invoked the authorisation to issue legal proceedings before the High Court. Simons J held that the claim for personal injuries had thus moved well beyond the PIAB process and the claim could only be resolved in the context of the extant legal proceedings. Simons J held that the legislation is predicated on the principle that the PIAB process is consensual and not intended to oust the jurisdiction of the courts. Simons J held that it follows that the application pursuant to s. 35 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 was inadmissible in circumstances where the assessment of damages was spent; it cannot be accepted retrospectively by the claimant nor approved by the court.

Simons J dismissed the application.

Application dismissed.

Appearances

Philip Sheahan, SC for the plaintiff instructed by John A. Sinnott & Co.

JUDGMENT ofMr. Justice Garrett Simonsdelivered on 29 July 2022

INTRODUCTION

1 This matter comes before the High Court by way of an application to approve an assessment of damages made by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board. The assessment of damages had been made in the context of a claim for personal injuries arising out of a road traffic accident. As the claimant, Noah Cogley, is a minor, court approval would have been required before the assessment of damages could become legally binding. The claimant will be referred to as “ the injured child” where convenient.

2 The difficulty with the application is that the assessment of damages has already been rejected by the injured child, through his next friend, and a personal injuries action commenced before the High Court. The principal issue for determination in this judgment is whether it is now open to the injured child to rewind the clock and to accept the previously rejected assessment of damages.

STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

3 In most instances, it is a necessary first step to the pursuit of a personal injuries claim that the claimant make an application to the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (“ PIAB”) for an assessment of damages. This procedural step must be completed prior to the institution of any legal proceedings. There are a number of exceptions to this requirement: it does not apply, for example, in cases of alleged medical negligence.

4 The requirement to apply for an assessment of damages is provided for under the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 (“ PIAB Act 2003”). Importantly, the legislation prescribes that a PIAB assessment can only ever become legally binding in circumstances where both the claimant and the respondent have accepted that assessment.

5 This reflects the consensual nature of the process for the assessment of damages under the PIAB Act 2003. The Act does not purport to put in place a parallel process of adjudication which restricts...