O'Looney v Minister for the Public Service

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 15 December 1986
• Date: 15 December 1986
• Docket Number: [S.C. No. 53 of 1986]
• Court: Supreme Court

Supreme Court

[S.C. No. 53 of 1986]

O'Looney v. Minister for the Public Service

In re the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Acts, 1941 and 1945, Gerald O'Looney

Applicant

and

The Minister for the Public Service

Respondent

Cases mentioned in this report:—

McLoughlin v. The Minister for the Public Service [1986] I.R. 361; [1986] I.L.R.M. 28.

O'Brien v. The Minister for Finance (No. 1) [1944] I.R. 392.

O'Brien v. The Minister for Finance (No. 2) [1946] I.R. 314.

Parry v. Cleaver [1970] A.C. 1; [1969] 2 W.L.R. 821; [1969] 1 All E.R. 555; [1969] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 183.

Garda Síochána - Personal injuries - Maliciously inflicted - Discharge from force as result of injuries - Special pension awarded on discharge - Claim for compensation - Assessment -Principles applicable - Future economic loss - Mitigiation of loss by award of pension - Whether value of pension to be deducted from value of future economic loss proved - Garda Síochána (Compensation) Act, 1941 (No. 19), s. 10, sub-ss. 2 and 3 - Garda Síochána (Compensation) (Amendment) Act, 1945 (No. 1), s. 2, sub-section 2.

Case Stated.

The applicant applied to the High Court under the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Acts, 1941 and 1945, for a decree of compensation against the respondent in respect of personal injuries maliciously inflicted on him in the course of the performance of his duties on the 7th December, 1983. On the 14th February, 1986, the President (Hamilton P.) at the request of the respondent, stated a case pursuant to s. 9 of the Garda Síochána (Compensation) Act, 1941, in which he referred a certain question of law for determination by the Supreme Court.

The question so referred by the President was:— "As to whether in assessing the compensation payable to the applicant for financial loss I should have regard to the special pension now payable to him and deduct the value of the same from the loss proved."

Section 9 of the Act of 1941 provides:— "The judge hearing an application to the High Court for compensation under this Act may, if he so thinks proper on his own motion or at the request of the applicant or of the Minister for Finance [now the Minister for the Public Service], state a case for the opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law arising during the hearing of such application."

The Garda Síochána (Compensation) Acts, 1941-1945, provide, inter alia, for the granting of compensation out of public monies to members of the Garda Síochána on whom personal injuries have been maliciously inflicted. By s. 10, sub-s. 2 of the Act of 1941, the court, in fixing compensation under the Act:—

"(a) shall have regard to any medical or surgical expenses incurred or likely to be incurred by the applicant in respect or in consequence of the injuries, and

(b) shall take into consideration the detrimental effect which the injuries might reasonably be expected to have on the future earning power generally of the applicant and, in particular (if the injuries do not preclude the applicant from continuing to be a member of the Garda Síochána), on his future career in that force, and

(c) shall have regard to the pain and suffering caused by the injuries to the applicant and also, in a proper case, to any disease or tendancy to disease caused by the injuries."

By s. 10, sub-s. 3, para (a) of the Act of 1941, the court, in fixing the amount of compensation payable under the Act, "shall take into consideration the fact, if it is a fact, that the applicant is entitled . . . to a pension, allowance, or gratuity out of public funds in respect of the . . . injuries which is or are the subject of the application, but shall not regard the amount of such pension, allowance, or gratuity (if any) as a measure or standard by reference to which the amount of the compensation is to be fixed."

The applicant applied to the High Court, pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of 1941-1945, for compensation for personal injuries maliciously inflicted on him in the course of the performance of his duties as a member of the Garda Síochána. As a result of his injuries he had been discharged from the force and had been awarded a special pension. It was argued in the High Court on behalf of the respondent that the court should take into consideration, by way of deduction from the actuarial calculation of the loss of salary, an actuarial calculation of the value of the special pension being paid to the applicant, as not to do so would be to compensate the applicant twice for the financial loss which he would incur in the future. The High Court (Hamilton P.) stated a case for the opinion of the Supreme Court on the question whether, in assessing compensation payable in respect of financial loss, the court should have regard to the special pension payable to the applicant, and deduct the value of the same from the value of the loss proved.

Held by the Supreme Court (Walsh J., Henchy, Griffin and Hederman JJ. concurring; McCarthy J. dissenting), that, since payment to the...