Boy awarded €35K for Broken Leg, suffered falling through trampoline

ballsymchugh · 26-11-2014 7:15pm

this litigious culture is one of the main reasons why ireland is an expensive place. public liability and professional indemnity is too high and costs have to be passed on to the customer. it's time the legal profession was pulled up on this.

take this case, where the client fortunately lost.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-25352082.html

Lia_lia · 26-11-2014 7:16pm

I dislocated my kneecap on a trampoline years ago. My cousin broke her elbow on the same trampoline. Hmmmm..

Odyssey 2005 · 26-11-2014 7:21pm

Lia_lia wrote: »

I dislocated my kneecap on a trampoline years ago. My cousin broke her elbow on the same trampoline. Hmmmm..

Too late now,you will just be seen to be JUMPING on the bandwagon

Littlekittylou · 26-11-2014 7:41pm

Never had any experience with compensation claims.

I only got health insurance in recent years anyway. I think it's the only insurance policy I have. It's rubbish.

I guess he should get his medical bills and then whatever maybe 2 k for pain and suffering. Then the company should be made to recall all models of that trampoline and be compliant with better safety standards.

I did once dislocate my shoulder pretty badly through the fault of someone else but I would never of sued. It only cost me like maybe a couple of hundred in all. Doctor plus they gave me anti-inflammatory drugs to keep the swelling down and some paracetamol and a sling.

My Dad got injured playing football and would never have dreamt of claiming. He even got physio. Still didn't claim.

My brother broke his leg on a Tennis court and never would have thought about it either. It was kind of weird because when I asked him what he did to break it he said 'I jumped'. It wasn't expensive or anything it was just waiting for it to heal. These things happen.

It would be better if the child simply had there medical bills paid and then the company was made to recall the trampoline model and it was banned for good.

I think the company should be made to recall the trampoline though. But to be honest when you jump on one you know it is a risk.

Overflow · 26-11-2014 7:51pm

jaykay74 wrote: »

Were the brakes faulty or did you just crash through bad driving?

Was the trampoline faulty ?

anncoates · 26-11-2014 7:54pm

What would people recommend for greasing the surface of a child's trampoline?

SureYWouldntYa · 26-11-2014 7:55pm

anncoates wrote: »

What would people recommend for greasing the surface of a child's trampoline?

grease

Kenny Logins · 26-11-2014 7:57pm

anncoates wrote: »

What would people recommend for greasing the surface of a child's trampoline?

A call from social services.

Greenmachine · 26-11-2014 8:03pm

I raise you €1.78M.

the girls decided to stand up on the seat, link arms, and sway against the movement of the bus as it rounded corners.

The girls were all taken to hospital in Galway suffering from injuries including grazed elbows and head wounds. Bernadette Nicholson was later transferred to Beaumont Hospital.

No mention of broken limbs, or longterm injuries.

Honey Monster · 26-11-2014 8:04pm

I must be owed a fortune from when I was a kid. Broken arms and legs all over the place.

mikemac1 · 26-11-2014 8:07pm

Did you hear about the Dublin Bus that had 50 passengers on board and crashed in Fairview?

When the emergency services showed up there were 100 passengers on the bus

Greenmachine · 26-11-2014 8:08pm

mikemac1 wrote: »

Did you hear about the Dublin Bus that had 50 passengers on board and crashed in Fairview?

When the emergency services showed up there were 100 passengers on the bus

Do tell. Claim would not go anywhere without proof you were on board.

mikemac1 · 26-11-2014 8:09pm

Oh it's not true, it's just an old story from http://www.overheardindublin.com

Joke fail

Paz-CCFC · 26-11-2014 8:38pm

Seems a pretty standard compensation sum for the injury. The Injury's Board have a range of €15,400 to €35,600 for a fractured lower leg if it has "substantially recovered". It includes fractures to both the fibula and tibia (the latter being more serious). The child had both, taking nine months to recover, so it would be on the upper end of the scale.

To go through the IB/PIAB, the party has to have admitted liability, and only be disputing the amount. There's no need for solicitors, it's a fairly modest fee. It would've all been sorted at least a year earlier, too. Smyth's chose to dispute the negligence claim, however, and it ended up costing them more in the long run (settled for slightly more in the end, solicitor costs etc.).

Greenmachine wrote: »

I raise you €1.78M.

No mention of broken limbs, or longterm injuries.

But there was a mention of a "severe head injury". You also left out some key elements of that article, which you conveniently didn't give a link for.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/settlement-of-178m-approved-for-girl-who-fell-from-school-bus-window-30777360.html

"a young girl sustained a severe head injury when she fell out of the back window of a school bus"

"Four girls - Sarah Lawlor, Claire McGrath, Bernadette Nicholson, and Saoirse McWalters - fell onto the road as the back window fell out and crashed onto the road."

"Judge Fahy found Bus Eireann guilty of being the owner of a vehicle with a defect that was a danger to the public and that could have been discovered through the exercise of ordinary care.

She did not accept that pressure by the children alone would have been enough to cause the window to slip out."

It seems that she's very lucky to be alive, never mind without serious brain damage.

naughtysmurf · 26-11-2014 9:12pm

wuzziwig wrote: »

That's it. My kids are going to bounce like bejaysus when I get home.

What kind of a parent are you, it's far too cold & foggy outside for the kids, bring the Swingball inside, guaranteed head injury, sorted

ScumLord · 26-11-2014 9:36pm

Littlekittylou wrote: »

I only got health insurance in recent years anyway. I think it's the only insurance policy I have. It's rubbish.

Until something goes wrong. You can go decades without ever using it but when something serious does go wrong you'll be damn glad to have it.

Then the company should be made to recall all models of that trampoline and be compliant with better safety standards.

That's probably not going to happen, people don't care about safety when they're in the shop, all they care about is the lowest price. The shop could bring in something safe that's twice the price but no one would buy it. From a financial point of view it's better to sell the cheap one, sell loads of them and deal with the fallout as they can share the fallout with the supplier.

My Dad got injured playing football and would never have dreamt of claiming. He even got physio. Still didn't claim.

That's because back then people didn't like to publicly announce stupid mistakes they make.

Greenmachine · 26-11-2014 10:16pm

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

But there was a mention of a "severe head injury". You also left out some key elements of that article, which you conveniently didn't give a link for.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/settlement-of-178m-approved-for-girl-who-fell-from-school-bus-window-30777360.html

"a young girl sustained a severe head injury when she fell out of the back window of a school bus"

"Four girls - Sarah Lawlor, Claire McGrath, Bernadette Nicholson, and Saoirse McWalters - fell onto the road as the back window fell out and crashed onto the road."

"Judge Fahy found Bus Eireann guilty of being the owner of a vehicle with a defect that was a danger to the public and that could have been discovered through the exercise of ordinary care.

She did not accept that pressure by the children alone would have been enough to cause the window to slip out."

It seems that she's very lucky to be alive, never mind without serious brain damage.

I had intended to link to the article. Judge are idiots. I am not debating the fact that she was injured.. The article fails horrendously to quantify what her serious head injuries were. That could mean anything, like a laceration to the ear, a concussion, or even an acquired injury.
I was pointed out the fact that from the article the judge seem to have given not enough weight to the client negligence being a contributory factor in her injuries.

Paz-CCFC · 27-11-2014 12:23am

Greenmachine wrote: »

I had intended to link to the article. Judge are idiots.

The judge didn't award the €1.78M. That was a settlement between the parties.

I am not debating the fact that she was injured.. The article fails horrendously to quantify what her serious head injuries were.

Articles on cases tend to be all too lacking on very important details in a case. It's hard to summarise in a few hundred words a case that likely has hundreds, possibly thousands of pages of evidence. That's why you shouldn't put all your weight behind them to criticise a judge, when you've only read one article and he's read the hundreds of pages of evidence.

I was pointed out the fact that from the article the judge seem to have given not enough weight to the client negligence being a contributory factor in her injuries.

It's possible that, had there not been a settlement, the High Court justice would've held contributory negligence. In which case, a percentage would have been put on the plaintiff's fault and the award reduced by that amount. It's hard to fully judge the judge without a) witnessing the case first hand or b) reading his judgment.

I'm not sure if something like this would get a reported judgment, but if it does, you might find it on courts.ie

jamesbere · 27-11-2014 12:42am

Considering the poor state of the footpath outside my work place I could "trip" tomorrow evening after work.

Greenmachine · 27-11-2014 2:56pm

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

The judge didn't award the €1.78M. That was a settlement between the parties.

Articles on cases tend to be all too lacking on very important details in a case. It's hard to summarise in a few hundred words a case that likely has hundreds, possibly thousands of pages of evidence. That's why you shouldn't put all your weight behind them to criticise a judge, when you've only read one article and he's read the hundreds of pages of evidence.

It's possible that, had there not been a settlement, the High Court justice would've held contributory negligence. In which case, a percentage would have been put on the plaintiff's fault and the award reduced by that amount. It's hard to fully judge the judge without a) witnessing the case first hand or b) reading his judgment.

I'm not sure if something like this would get a reported judgment, but if it does, you might find it on courts.ie

You have raised some very good points.

Pro Hoc Vice · 27-11-2014 3:09pm

Greenmachine wrote: »

I had intended to link to the article. Judge are idiots. I am not debating the fact that she was injured.. The article fails horrendously to quantify what her serious head injuries were. That could mean anything, like a laceration to the ear, a concussion, or even an acquired injury.
I was pointed out the fact that from the article the judge seem to have given not enough weight to the client negligence being a contributory factor in her injuries.

it amazes me that people think judges dont hear any evidence and just pluck figures out of the air. How is a newspaper Article being bad the fault of the Judge, if the journalist decides to leave important bits out of the report, then ya just jump to the conclusion that the judge is an idiot, clever that.

1 A plaintiff must prove negligence on behalf of the defendant to the civil standard of proof. Usually done with the Plaintiffs evidence and expert evidence.
2 The Plaintiff must prove injury again by their own evidence and a doctors evidence.
3 The Plaintiff must allow the Defendant access to a lot of personal information including past injuries and accidents aswell as medical records.
4 The Defendant can produce evidence to prove no negligence or no or little injury.
5 Finally its open to the Defendant to prove contributory negligence.

When all that evidence is presented to the court the Judge makes a decision. Most court reports in news papers are inaccurate or a downright lie. When giving out about a decision at least have all the evidence like the judge did.

Grab All Association · 27-11-2014 8:43pm

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Seems a pretty standard compensation sum for the injury. The Injury's Board have a range of €15,400 to €35,600 for a fractured lower leg if it has "substantially recovered". It includes fractures to both the fibula and tibia (the latter being more serious). The child had both, taking nine months to recover, so it would be on the upper end of the scale.

To go through the IB/PIAB, the party has to have admitted liability, and only be disputing the amount. There's no need for solicitors, it's a fairly modest fee. It would've all been sorted at least a year earlier, too. Smyth's chose to dispute the negligence claim, however, and it ended up costing them more in the long run (settled for slightly more in the end, solicitor costs etc.).

But there was a mention of a "severe head injury". You also left out some key elements of that article, which you conveniently didn't give a link for.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/settlement-of-178m-approved-for-girl-who-fell-from-school-bus-window-30777360.html

"a young girl sustained a severe head injury when she fell out of the back window of a school bus"

"Four girls - Sarah Lawlor, Claire McGrath, Bernadette Nicholson, and Saoirse McWalters - fell onto the road as the back window fell out and crashed onto the road."

"Judge Fahy found Bus Eireann guilty of being the owner of a vehicle with a defect that was a danger to the public and that could have been discovered through the exercise of ordinary care.

She did not accept that pressure by the children alone would have been enough to cause the window to slip out."

It seems that she's very lucky to be alive, never mind without serious brain damage.

After the bus stopped to let one boy off at his home at Ballymara, the girls decided to stand up on the seat, link arms, and sway against the movement of the bus as it rounded corners.

If they had of remained seated it wouldn't have happened.

Paz-CCFC · 27-11-2014 9:52pm

Greenmachine wrote: »

You have raised some very good points.

It's something to always be mindful. And if the judgment is available, it is best to read it before making your mind up. It's the best way to make an informed opinion.

Chris___ wrote: »

After the bus stopped to let one boy off at his home at Ballymara, the girls decided to stand up on the seat, link arms, and sway against the movement of the bus as it rounded corners.

If they had of remained seated it wouldn't have happened.

You were there, were you? Or you've read over the evidence presented by the experts? Seeing as you seem so sure about it, moreso than the court...

The judges in both the District and High Courts decided, based on the full set of evidence provided by both parties, that the window would have fallen off and that they would have been injured regardless of standing up on the seats. They examined the evidence and give a reasoned judgment - they didn't spout an ad hoc opinion like yourself.

As Pro Hoc Vice said, the burden is on the plaintiff. They had to prove that there was a duty of care owed by Bus Éireann - there was, BÉ owe a duty of care towards their passengers. Then they must prove that that duty was breached - it was, as the bus was not kept to an adequate standard and was a danger to its passengers. Then, a causal link between the negligent act and the injury suffered by the plaintiff - but for the bus being kept to a proper standard, they would not have suffered such injuries/there was proximity between negligence and injury. And then actual damage - serious head injuries. There's also public policy considerations which may defeat/mitigate a claim - say, if the compensation was so much that it would have the effect of bankrupting BÉ, that would not be good for the country's transport infrastructure. And they can claim contributory negligence, which can also be mitigatory.

So, there's a number of hurdles which they must clear before being successful. All the defendant has to do is bring them down on one of those hurdles and the claim will fail.

Capt'n Midnight · 28-11-2014 2:41am

I'll just leave this here

https://i.imgur.com/hS0zJCe.jpg

Boy awarded €35K for Broken Leg, suffered falling through trampoline

Comments