Platt v OBH Luxury Accomodation Ltd

JurisdictionIreland
CourtHigh Court
JudgeMr. Justice Bernard J. Barton
Judgment Date11 November 2015
Neutral Citation[2015] IEHC 793
Docket Number[2011 No. 2047 P]
Date11 November 2015
BETWEEN
JASON PLATT
PLAINTIFFS
AND
OBH LUXURY ACCOMODATION LIMITED AND CIARAN FITZGERALD
DEFENDANTS

[2015] IEHC 793

Barton J.

[2011 No. 2047 P]

THE HIGH COURT

Tort – Damages & Restitution – Breach of contract – Misrepresentation – Occupier's Liability Act, 1995 – The Hotel Proprietor's Act, 1963 – Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 – Contributory negligence – Dismissal of claim

Facts: The plaintiff claimed damages for breach of contract and misrepresentation against the defendants owing to the injuries suffered by the plaintiff as a result of the fall from one of the windows of the room of a hotel where the plaintiff had been staying with his fiancee. The defendant asserted that the determination of the reason of the plaintiff's fall was necessary as the proceedings would came to an end if it was established that the plaintiff had jumped out of his own will and volition.

Mr. Justice Bernard J. Barton dismissed the claim of the plaintiff. The Court on the basis of the surveillance video presented by the defendants held that the plaintiff was guilty of adducing false and misleading evidence under s. 26 of the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004. The Court, however, rejected the contention of the defendant that the plaintiff had tried to commit suicide and found the defendant in breach of duty under the Occupier's Liability Act, 1995. The Court observed that the plaintiff had intentionally sworn false affidavits and given false account of his health and to the concerned medical experts and professionals who were not responsible for the factual contents of the pleadings or information given in replies to particulars.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Bernard J. Barton delivered on the 11th day of November, 2015
1

Shortly after 11 pm on the 15th of February 2009, the Plaintiff, who was a guest in The Old Bank House, Kinsale, Co. Cork (the premises), fell from the open window of his bedroom onto the roof of the adjoining post office. As a result of the fall the plaintiff suffered multiple and potentially life threatening injuries in respect of which he brings these proceedings.

2

Quite how the plaintiff came to fall from the window is but one of several hotly contested issues which the Court is required to determine. That the plaintiff fell onto the roof is not in question. He says he lost his balance. The defendants say he threw himself out of the window; in short, that he jumped. If the plaintiff jumped it was agreed that that would be the end of the case. Accordingly, it is proposed to determine that issue first.

3

The first and second named defendants are sued as the owners and occupiers of the premises, which, at that time, was run as an adjunct of or annex to the Blue Haven Hotel, Kinsale. The plaintiff brings these proceedings against the defendants for breach of contract and/or alternatively for misrepresentation, negligence and breach of duty at common law or, alternatively, for breach of statutory duty pursuant to the provisions of the Occupier's Liability Act, 1995 and the Hotel Proprietor's Act, 1963.

4

The defence delivered on the 21st of December 2011, put the plaintiff on full proof of his claim save for an admission that he and his fiancée were lawful visitors and that the premises was in the occupation and ownership of the first defendant. The defence otherwise raises a plea that the plaintiff was guilty of negligence, including contributory negligence, the essence of which is that the plaintiff was the author of his own misfortune, in particular by throwing himself out of the window of their bedroom following a row with his fiancée. A special reply to the defence joining issue with those pleas was delivered on the 21st of November 2012.

Background
5

The plaintiff was born on the 7th of March 1972 and resides with his partner, Ms. McKenna, at 7 Queensland Avenue, Thatto Heath, St. Helens, Merseyside, England. The plaintiff and Ms. McKenna have known one another since 2005 and came to Kinsale on a short break for Valentine's weekend.

6

Some six months earlier the plaintiff had commenced a training course with a view to changing career and qualifying as a Sky installation engineer. He had completed his training and was due to start work the week following the break away in Kinsale. The plaintiff's previous vocational history included twelve years working as a commis chef after which he qualified for and undertook work as a heavy goods vehicle driver.

7

With regard to his sporting and recreational life, the plaintiff had engaged in judo and boxing for some ten years and had also played rugby from the age of eleven until he was nearly thirty years old. Early in his rugby playing career, and whilst on a rugby tour of Ireland, the plaintiff had stayed in Kinsale. He had fond memories of his stay there and wanted to bring his fiancée to stay and see the town.

8

On the Saturday of the Valentine's weekend the plaintiff and his fiancée spent the day sightseeing and ended it with dinner in the Blue Haven Hotel. They had become engaged, had celebrated with champagne and had thoroughly enjoyed themselves. On the Sunday morning Ms. McKenna awoke feeling ill. She has been diagnosed and treated for epilepsy or anxiety fits; consequently she is not supposed to take alcohol. She had a cup of tea but was unable to eat a breakfast. Afterwards they went back up to the room and packed their suitcases as they wanted to have the rest of the day free of that chore. Ms McKenna was still feeling unwell. She thought she might have been pregnant but a test proved negative. They then went out for some lunch during which, on the plaintiff's evidence, he had two pints of Murphy's stout. Afterwards, they went for short walk following which they returned to their bedroom where they watched television.

9

At about six o'clock, and as it was their last night, they decided to go out. They went to the White House Inn where the plaintiff had stayed previously whilst on the rugby tour. His recollection was that his fiancée had one or two peach schnapps. She might also have had vodka. Her evidence was that she had had three or four drinks. She felt better. As to his own consumption the plaintiff's evidence was that he had consumed three pints of Murphy's stout.

10

Having had their drinks the plaintiff and his fiancée went to a Chinese for a meal. They arrived there at between half nine and ten. Ms. McKenna had started to feel unwell again and asked the plaintiff to order her some soup, which he did. The plaintiff also ordered a couple of starters and a couple of main courses.

11

By the time Ms. McKenna came back from the ladies toilet, the plaintiff had eaten the starters and also had started to eat Ms. McKenna's soup to which she reacted badly. She described herself as being a bit obsessive / compulsive about her food and in particular did not like anyone touching it. The plaintiff was aware of that. Annoyed by his behaviour, and because she was also feeling unwell again, she went back to their accommodation, taking the room key and leaving the plaintiff alone.

12

He ate some of the food and, according to his evidence, had a few sips out of another pint of Murphys but did not finish that drink before paying his bill and leaving. The plaintiff accepted that there had been some cross words between himself and Ms. McKenna whom he described as being in a bit of “a mood” before she left. The plaintiff did not have a room key and as it was approaching eleven o'clock he had to go down to the Blue Haven to get a key. He met the duty manager, Seamus Healy, whom he took to be night porter.

13

The plaintiff returned to the Old Bank House with Mr. Healy. As they approached the room it was the plaintiff's evidence that he thought the door was closed. His recollection was that Mr. Healy was walking in front of him. The door was then opened slightly. The plaintiff tried to speak to Ms. McKenna but she closed the door. The plaintiff told Mr. Healy that he would talk to Ms. McKenna and felt sure that eventually she would let him in. Mr. Healy left indicating that if necessary the plaintiff could stay in the Blue Haven for the night.

14

Mr. Healy having departed, the plaintiff made a number of efforts to get Ms. McKenna to open the door. He was concerned that Ms. McKenna had become more ill because of the mix of medication and drink.

15

Rather than returning to the Blue Haven to get a key, the plaintiff decided to break into the room by shoulder barging the door. He gained entry by doing so, breaking the lock and door frame in the process; the door was left hanging off its hinges.

16

On the plaintiff's evidence Ms. McKenna had been sick and was in the bathroom where she remained. She declined his offer of help. He decided to have a cigarette. There was a large double window in the bedroom which was essentially made up of two inward opening window sashes. There was a low window sill which was of sufficient dimensions that it could be used as a seat. The plaintiff's evidence was that he opened one of the windows and sat on the window ledge or sill. He was facing in towards the room. He knew that he ought not to have been smoking so was trying the blow the smoke out of the window.

17

On the plaintiff's engineering evidence, the distance from the window opening down to the roof of the adjoining post office was 7 metres. When he got to the end of the cigarette the Plaintiff put his arm out of the window and tried to flick the cigarette away so that if seen it would not be considered to have come from their room. It was at this juncture that he lost his balance. He couldn't recall whether he had kneeled to flick the cigarette away and that his knees had slipped or quite how he had come to fall, but one way or the other he described himself as going backwards and sideways out of the window. Ms McKenna gave evidence that when she visited the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
6 cases
  • Trevor Murphy v Helen Palmer
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 4 March 2021
    ...Curtain Walling Systems Ltd & Anor [2012] IEHC 441, Lackey v. Kavanagh [2013] IEHC 341, Platt v. OBH Luxury Accommodation Ltd & Anor [2015] IEHC 793 and the decision of the Court of Appeal in the same case upholding the decision of the High Court with neutral citation [2017] IECA 221. In ad......
  • Platt v OBH Luxury Accommodation Ltd
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 28 July 2017
    ...to do so, the court acceded to the defendants' application pursuant to s. 26 of the 2004 Act and dismissed the plaintiff's claim (see [2015] IEHC 793). The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal. Held, by the Court of Appeal (Finlay Geoghegan, Peart and Irvine JJ.) in dismissing the appe......
  • Jason Platt v The High Court of the Republic of Ireland
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 15 July 2024
    ...done”. 18 In a judgment which was handed down on 19 January 2016, Barton J allowed the defendants' application and dismissed the claim: [2015] IEHC 793. He found that the Appellant had given evidence that was dishonest, unreliable and lacking in credibility. The extent of his disabilities a......
  • O'Sullivan v Brozda
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 14 July 2022
    ...The High Court (Barton J) found that the window was unsafe but that the plaintiff had contributed to his accident to the extent of 40% ( [2015] IEHC 793). However, Barton J went to find that the plaintiff's evidence as to the extent of his disabilities and the level of his pain was dishones......
  • Get Started for Free