Author: admin

A MAN who, as a teenager ended up blind and unable to walk after he went to Cork University Hospital (CUH) with a brain shunt problem, has settled a High Court action for €25million.

Conor McCormack’s counsel told the court that in the hospital nothing was done for three weeks. As a result, Mr McCormack suffered a devastating brain injury which left him blind.

Liam Reidy SC, instructed by solicitor Ernest Cantillon, said Mr McCormack’s mother was “dancing up and down” looking for help.

Sandra McCormack told Mr Justice Paul Coffey how her pleas for help in the hospital went unanswered.

Her now 23-year-old son – who had a brain shunt inserted when he was a baby – was brought to CUH after collapsing at his home in Douglas, Co Cork, in October 2014.

“Our lives were shattered after the events of 2014. Conor was in so much pain and it was so devastating to watch him lose his sight, hearing and mobility,” she said.

“We were all so distraught that our cries for help went unanswered.”

The award, she told the judge, is bittersweet but it will allow the family to give Conor the life he deserves.

“He has experienced so much pain and loss in his young life, but he just accepts it. He is absolutely amazing. We are in awe of him,” she said.

He now needs assistance with all activities necessary for daily living.

Mr McCormack’s counsel, Liam Reidy SC, told the court that the problem with the brain shunt remained undiagnosed and a diagnosis of tummy problems was made.

The McCormacks, he said, had been told of the warning signs and symptoms in relation to shunt blockage when their son had to have a shunt inserted in his skull when he was one year old.

Mr Reidy said Mr McCormack’s treatment in the hospital was “nothing short of appalling”. Counsel said Mr McCormack remained without consultant cover for three weeks despite all the pleas of his mother.

“It was a nightmare for her,” he said.

The court was told the HSE had in November this year, in a limited admission, accepted the management of the patient, when he was admitted to the hospital in 2014, fell below the acceptable standards of care.

Outside court, the McCormacks pleaded with doctors to listen to parents.

“If we have one message to give to doctors it is to please listen to what the parents have to say about their child.

“They have important information to give and should be listened to,” they said.

In a statement read out by their solicitor Mr Cantillon, the McCormacks said they explained to the doctors their belief that there was a shunt malfunction. They added that a CT scan on October 8, 2014 showed there was a fault in the tubing.

“It took a further three weeks before action was taken to revise the shunt and we ended up with a child with challenges, and completely and utterly debilitated both physically and mentally. He was unable to walk and was blind.”

They said they took Conor home and nursed him as best they could.

“After struggling for two years, we managed to get him to a position where he can now walk short distances. We were left without any support or help.”

Mr McCormack, through his mother Sandra, sued the HSE over the care and treatment he received at CUH in 2014.

On October 7, 2014, he had a seizure at home and was admitted to the hospital where a CT scan showed the shunt tubing had disconnected and did not extend through the skull.

It was claimed, among other things, there was a failure to act promptly to warning signs and symptoms of intracranial pressure.

There was an alleged failure to carry out surgery to correct the shunt caused over and above brain damage in the form of cortical blindness consistent with an acquired brain injury.

There was an alleged failure, for three weeks, to appreciate that a constellation of symptoms including rising blood pressure, increasing headache, drowsiness and seizure-like episodes were consistent with raised intracranial pressure due to shunt failure.

It was also claimed there was a failure to surgically explore the shunt between October 9 and October 24, 2014, prior to Mr McCormack’s deterioration, which it was contended would have resulted in a better outcome for the teenager .

Approving the settlement, Mr Justice Coffey conveyed his best wishes to Mr McCormack “and his remarkable parents”.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/25-million-for-man-left-blind-and-unable-to-walk-after-hospitals-lack-of-action-despite-parents-warnings-41092105.html

A boy who was three years old when he had two accidents at a creche within a few months of each other has settled his High Court action for €56,000.

Sonny Roe, who is now six years old, on the first occasion slipped in a sandpit and struck his head against logs around the edge. Three months later, he fell and hurt his lip when he tried to climb up on to a raised flower bed, the court heard.

Sonny (now 6), of Thormanby Lawns, Howth, Co Dublin, had through his father Philip Roe, sued Monica Campbell Ltd, trading as Little Rainbows, Sutton, Co Dublin, as a result of two separate accidents.

In an affidavit, Philip Roe said his son suffered two accidents while he was in the care of the creche, which is located in the grounds of a school in Sutton.

Mr Roe said in October 2018, his son struck his head on the edge of logs in a sandpit; and, in January 2019, when the little boy attempted to climb up on a flower bed area he slipped, fell and sustained an injury to his lip.

Liability was denied in relation to the first accident in the sandpit, but liability was admitted in relation to the second flowerbed incident.

In the first accident his son sustained a laceration to the right side of his upper forehead. In the second, the court heard, the injuries were more serious and the boy sustained a laceration to his upper lip and he had to go to hospital where he had surgery.

Approving the settlement Mr Justice Garrett Simons said he had seen photographs and the child had minor scarring about the lip area and a bulge inside the lip.

Happily, the judge said the boy has made a very good recovery and the scarring was very minor.

The €55,000 damages settlement the judge said was reasonable compensation when the fact that the scarring was very minor was taken into account. He also noted there were special damages of €1,000 bringing the total award to €56,000.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/56000-for-boy-who-had-two-accidents-at-creche-41100384.html

Jason O’Sullivan, solicitor and public affairs consultant at J.O.S Solicitors, calls on Irish insurers to make good on their promises to lower premiums.

The lobbying and public affairs industry in Ireland plays an important role in helping to shape public policy and legislative agendas. It is an important function for both commercial and not-for-profit entities to have their voices heard on topics of importance aligned with strategic goals and objectives.

Too often, political decisions of lasting impact on citizens can be rationalised as mere “parish pump” politics or based on party pact allegiances, while the commercial influence of lobbying can be deemed marginal. The latter is not the case; all TDs within Leinster House are lobbied on a daily basis, whether for commercial or societal objectives. It seems fair to say, however, that the industries who have the deeper pockets to fund such activities usually achieve their desired objectives.

Take, for example, the insurance industry in Ireland. Through its relentless lobbying of government in recent years, it has managed to influence a significant piece of legislative policy that will significantly contribute to increased profits for the sector and its biggest players.

The new Judicial Council guidelines for personal injuries came into effect on 24th April this year to much furore. It was heralded as a new era for businesses that would directly lead to decreased insurance premiums, whilst lowering personal injury compensation in line with UK levels.

These guidelines were introduced at a time when the total number of liability-related personal injury claims had fallen by 47 per cent over the previous 11 years between the period 2009-2019, and by a further 16 per cent in 2020.

The Alliance for Insurance Reform carried out a survey in April this year to coincide with the introduction of these new guidelines. The survey found that premiums for homecare business had doubled on renewal, while nursing homes were seeing an increase on average of 35 per cent. Hospitality experienced on average a nine per cent increase despite the sector seeing little activity due to the pandemic.

The latest data on the effects of the new guidelines were released in October this year and found that the value of average awards for personal injuries made by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) had fallen by 40 per cent from last year’s levels.

It was announced last week by the Central Bank in its industry report that insurance companies saw combined profits up to €163 million last year, a 10-year-high and 12 per cent increase.

Given this backdrop of increased profits and a new regime for personal injury damages, the insurance companies have largely negated on their pledge to lower premiums.

The only premiums that have seen a slight decrease is car insurance. Accordingly to the Central Bank report, driver’s premiums fell by seven per cent last year, albeit largely as a result of the pandemic, given decreased driving activity. If one accounts however, for the rebate to drivers, premiums were only down by a mere four per cent.

Business advocates such as ISME warned last week in response to the Central Bank report that many businesses are currently facing a “take-it-or-leave-it” premium increase for 2022, in respect to employers’ liability and public liability insurance for business, sporting and charitable bodies.

It was argued by the Law Society of Ireland, the representative body for solicitors at the time the new guidelines were being debated, that injury victims were entitled to be treated fairly by the courts. It also argued that there was “absolutely no evidence” that reducing damages in such claims would result in lower premiums. And that insurance premiums in the UK, where damages have always been much lower, have on average been consistently higher when compared to Ireland.

The Lobbying.ie website came into effect in January 2016 and is the central register for keeping account of all lobbying activities in Ireland. A mere glimpse of this register gives an insight into the sheer level of lobbying the insurance industry has undertaken to change policy on reducing personal injury damages.

Recent records show Insurance Ireland had been the most active sector lobbyist on the registrar on this policy topic in recent years, with close to 20 entries since 2018. Insurance Ireland is an association of companies that cover over 90 per cent of the Irish motor vehicle insurance market and its members include FBD Insurance, Aviva, RSA, Allianz, AIG, Liberty Insurance and Zurich, all of whom are separately registered as lobbying organisations in their own right.

It is worth recalling that the European Commission declared in June this year that Insurance Ireland breached EU antitrust rules by restricting competition in the car insurance market. The preliminary findings came after the commission opened a formal antitrust investigation into the organisation in May 2019 to assess whether it was operating a cartel. This investigation has not yet finished, but its very existence does place serious doubts on how competitive the insurance industry is in Ireland and in turn how fair Irish customers been treated.

Ultimately, the insurance industry has been more then effective in achieving its lobbying goals, which has worked in their favour and will lead to increased annual profits. The question remains though, whether they will pass on the fiscal benefits to their customers in kind, who are paying some of the highest premiums in Europe as annually reported? Only time will tell.

The Law Society forewarned to the government last year that “the effect of reducing damages will merely be to take from the pockets of injured victims of negligence and place into the pockets of an increasingly profitable insurance industry”.

There is a duty on the insurance industry to step up to the mark and keep its grandiose promises of lowering premiums on foot of these new guidelines. Any failure to do so will not only be a betrayal to their customers, but an injustice to all citizens and in particular to the victims of personal injury.

https://www.irishlegal.com/articles/opinion-its-time-for-the-insurance-industry-to-honour-its-promise-on-lowering-premiums