BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

1. The Applicant’s claim is for compensation for severe and personal injuries, loss and damage which he sustained while in the performance of his duty on the 21st day of May, 1994. The Applicant has been duly authorised in writing by the Minister for Justice to apply to the High Court for compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Acts. That authorisation was dated 10th December, 1999.

2. While on duty on 20th May, 1994 at approximately 3.05 am, the Applicant’s car, in which he was on duty as official driver, when the patrol car was rammed by a suspect car which did a U-turn in the middle of the road.

3. The Applicant sustained an injury to his neck and complained of pain extending from his neck to his belt level through his right shoulder.

4. He was certified fit for work on 15th June, 1994. However, his injuries did not resolve and he was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon who referred him to further physiotherapy.

5. He continued to experience reoccurring pain in his back, especially when driving for long periods and on duty.

6. On the 3rd June, 1998 he was again rammed by a stolen motorcar which compound his injuries. He attended the orthopaedic surgeon for review on 15th February, 1999. He had some tenderness in the right trepzius muscle with a decrease in rotation of his head to the right. There was a decrease in lumbar extension.

7. The Applicant says that the incidents and the consequential personal injuries have affected his work, his social and his recreational life. He was reoccurring pain in his back when driving for long periods on duty. He had to stop taking part in sporting activities due to reoccurring pain in his back. His back muscles tire easily. He finds that his strength has been weakened.

8. The orthopaedic surgeon, Mr. Paul B. McNamee, FRCSI, in his report dated 25th February, 1999 is of the opinion that the Applicant continues to have some problems related to his back and his neck. He still has some restrictions in rotation of his head. He feels that the residual symptoms should improve further with time and exercise, despite the length of time since this initial accident. He finds it impossible to work out how much of the present symptoms are related to the early accident of June and would expect that the symptoms from that would last in the region of six to twelve months.

9. In the orthopaedic surgeon’s previous report relating to the soft tissue injury sustained from the incident in May 1994, his opinion was that the Applicant would make a complete recovery within the next six to twelve months. Clearly the second accident has added to the time of recovery.

10. In a previous case (File No. 367/99) a claimant complained of pain in the back of his neck and lower back 48 hours after being rammed by a stolen car. He was diagnosed as suffering from whiplash injury, was prescribed pain killers and physiotherapy. He was referred to a consultant orthopaedic surgeon. In the opinion of the consultant a previous whiplash injury incurred by the applicant would have been aggravated by this incident because the surgeon was of the opinion that the Applicant sustained an exacerbation of his whiplash injuries to the back of his neck and his lower back area. The surgeon was of the opinion that in the long term there would be total recovery; no permanent disability or recurrence of symptoms from same. The injuries had not impacted adversely on his capabilities to carry out his duties. The injuries did impact on the quality of his life during the ensuing six months to two years. There would be no permanent disability in the long term. The Court awarded £8,000 in general damages to date and no future damages.

11. I have been referred case no. 3971/98 where the injuries were diagnosed as long term whiplash. X-ray examination revealed the presence of mild degenerative arthritis in the joints of the applicant’s cervical spine. In the opinion of the garda surgeon, this mild arthritis would continue to give rise to neck pains and discomfort. However, it would not impact adversely to any great degree on the quality of life. The injuries sustained would not impact adversely on the applicant’s capabilities to carry out his duties in long term, nor on his career development. Discomfort would continue for probably two to three years.

12. The Court awarded a sum of £50,000 for general damages to date and did not make any award in relation to future damage.

13. A third case, 1355/98, involved an assault where the garda was pushed to the ground and punched and kicked for some minutes. He complained of severe pain and discomfort shire of neck movements and in between the shoulder blades. The neck movement limitation continued for two to three months.

14. A garda surgeon found that he had sustained severe soft tissue injuries to the neck and the back of the upper thoracic area. He also had severe bruising to the arms and legs. He would heal completely over a period of three years and would not have any long term permanent disabilities from the injuries sustained. Those injuries would not affect his ability to carry on his duties.

15. The Court made an award of £20,000 for general damages to date and £35,000 for future damages.

16. In the present case Garda Walsh sustained a injury to his neck, shoulder and back.

17. Mr. Paul McNamee, Orthopaedic Surgeon, was of the opinion that he sustained a soft tissue injury to his neck and has had continuing problems relating to his injuries. He would expect him to make a complete recovery within the next six to twelve months (report 29/5/95).

18. As detailed above, the second opinion of the 25/2/99 was that he continue to get some problems related to his back and his neck. He still had some restriction and rotation of his head. His previous accident seem to have made his symptoms worse.

19. The Applicant has not made a claim in respect of the further accident. The consultant could not give an opinion as to how much the present symptoms are related to the earlier accident.

20. It seems to me in all the circumstances that an award of £25,000 to date is appropriate, together with special damages as agreed at £86.83 and costs.