Personal injury case against hospital, avoiding media?

iAmAThrower69

Hey,

I am suing hospital for personal injury/negligence.
The case went to high court few weeks ago.

I am just wondering at what point does media get involved?
As someone who reads news daily- it seems that every personal injury case against hospital goes public then there is quite a bit of backlash from public about it.

Is there a way to avoid it? How does it work?
Do you go to media to gain media attention or do they approach you and you can either opt in or out? Or do they just go ahead and publish all the details they know?


I would prefer to avoid it at all costs as I feel it would ruin my life completely.

Also side question: What's the difference between personal injury case going to circuit court or high court? (My solicitor never asked me about this and just went ahead with high court).


Thank You.

Feets

If they do print public information...this is out of your hands....but instruct your solicitor not to take any media calls and the same goes for you. They cant put words in your mouth.

iAmAThrower69

Feets wrote: »

If they do print public information...this is out of your hands....but instruct your solicitor not to take any media calls and the same goes for you. They cant put words in your mouth.

Could I not bring up GDPR in that case against media to avoid at least personal information being published?
That way if it says: "Local woman/man" instead of "Mr. Name Surname".

Miaireland

Court proceedings are normally open to the everyone (Family court is exempt normally and certain cases but normally not compensation cases). GDPR does not apply to information that is shared in open court. By taking the Claim you are requesting your case to be held in open court.

ED E

iAmAThrower69 wrote: »

I would prefer to avoid it at all costs as I feel it would ruin my life completely.

If you feel the backlash would be that strong does it not imply that your case is morally dubious?

iAmAThrower69

Miaireland wrote: »

Court proceedings are normally open to the everyone (Family court is exempt normally and certain cases but normally not compensation cases). GDPR does not apply to information that is shared in open court. By taking the Claim you are requesting your case to be held in open court.

So basically if media gets involved - there is no stopping them? They will get my personal details and case details?

Is there absolutely no way to anon-imise personal details at least?

iAmAThrower69

ED E wrote: »

If you feel the backlash would be that strong does it not imply that your case is morally dubious?

The case is legit, certainly more legit than woman falling off luas.
But I know the internet - people will find me and they will complain just because.

+ It would totally suck if people at my work found out about my past stuff.

Gunther1979

iAmAThrower69 wrote: »

Hey,

I am suing hospital for personal injury/negligence.
The case went to high court few weeks ago.

I am just wondering at what point does media get involved?
As someone who reads news daily- it seems that every personal injury case against hospital goes public then there is quite a bit of backlash from public about it.

Is there a way to avoid it? How does it work?
Do you go to media to gain media attention or do they approach you and you can either opt in or out? Or do they just go ahead and publish all the details they know?


I would prefer to avoid it at all costs as I feel it would ruin my life completely.

Also side question: What's the difference between personal injury case going to circuit court or high court? (My solicitor never asked me about this and just went ahead with high court).


Thank You.

mate i know a good solicitor, would get you a fair settlement
i'm talkin 1/4 of a mill

iAmAThrower69

Gunther1979 wrote: »

mate i know a good solicitor, would get you a fair settlement
i'm talkin 1/4 of a mill

I am good, thank you.

Gatling

Can't wait for the AH thread now

iAmAThrower69

Gatling wrote: »

Can't wait for the AH thread now

What do you mean?


Edit:

Nevermind, got it - After Hours (discuss news and stuff?)
Yeah that's one of my few biggest concerns, communities like that where it would go and get discussed and organise witch-hunt of some sort.

nuac

Many cases are settled before any evidence given. Only settlement figure announced. In such cases unlikely to be a press report.

I have known settlements announced as " for the amount and terms endorsed on counsels' briefs" which is fairly confidential.

aaakev

iAmAThrower69 wrote: »

What do you mean?


Edit:

Nevermind, got it - After Hours (discuss news and stuff?)
Yeah that's one of my few biggest concerns, communities like that where it would go and get discussed and organise witch-hunt of some sort.

Why are you so concerned about a witch hunt? If you have a genuine claim for personal injury no one is going to care and most people would be happy for you to get compensation if it was deserved.

This all comes across as a bit sketchy to me

splinter65

There is nothing you can do about media coverage of your negligence claim.
As someone else suggested, you can instruct your solicitor to not comment but there’s huge interest at the moment in these claims and, oddly enough, inquests, and paper never refused ink.

GM228

It's interesting to note (in light of GDPR being mentioned) that the media now have even greater abilities to report on cases under provisions of the Data Protection Act 2018 S159 (7).

Bona Fide members of the media can now have complete access to any document opened (or deemed to be opened) since 1st August to aid in the accurate reporting of cases.

Previously they only had the ability to report on what was said in open court, now they have complete access to any document opened or deemed to be opened even if not fully read out in court which regularly happens.

splinter65

Justice has to be done and has to be SEEN to be done.

Mrs OBumble

What people do is hire a PR consultant who knows the ways of getting the media to choose not to report the case.

Fann Linn

Personally, I wouldn't give a fcuk what came out.
If my case was genuine.

Changingtime

Fann Linn wrote: »

Personally, I wouldn't give a fcuk what came out.
If my case was genuine.

Yeah always as simple as that. Like if you were suing cause they messed up your penis extension

Fann Linn

Changingtime wrote: »

Yeah always as simple as that. Like if you were suing cause they messed up your penis extension

Or as opposed to the clown in todays Indo with 10 claims in a very short time.

Fr Tod Umptious

aaakev wrote: »

Why are you so concerned about a witch hunt? If you have a genuine claim for personal injury no one is going to care and most people would be happy for you to get compensation if it was deserved.

This all comes across as a bit sketchy to me

Ah come on
The internet is a cesspool of misinformation and parts of boards.ie are no better.

No matter how genuine a case is, plenty will have their say without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Even in your own post you are questioning the OPs bonafieds but suggesting that it is 'a bit sketchy'

irishgrover

Court cases must and should, for the most part, be in the public domain. However even the mildness of this thread displays the reality and ignorance of public opinion.
If I had a substandard interaction with a hospital that resulted in a material loss, and a justified lawsuit, it does not automatically follow that I would like to share every intimate detail of my condition, proceedure, interaction and following impact....
People seeking privacy does not equate to sham claims

McCrack

irishgrover wrote: »

Court cases must and should, for the most part, be in the public domain. However even the mildness of this thread displays the reality and ignorance of public opinion.
If I had a substandard interaction with a hospital that resulted in a material loss, and a justified lawsuit, it does not automatically follow that I would like to share every intimate detail of my condition, proceedure, interaction and following impact....
People seeking privacy does not equate to sham claims

Well if you had a "justified lawsuit" it would indicate your claim would settle through negotiations and not have to trouble a court

On the other hand the defendants are entitled to contest your allegations of negligence and have you prove your case in court and every little detail will need to be explored

irishgrover

McCrack wrote: »

Well if you had a "justified lawsuit" it would indicate your claim would settle through negotiations and not have to trouble a court

I'm assuming the "justified lawsuit" on occasion do not always settle through negotiations, otherwise no claims would be sucessful in court?
My point being that a failure to settle pre trial does not have a 100% correlation with it being a "bogus claim"

McCrack wrote: »

On the other hand the defendants are entitled to contest your allegations of negligence and have you prove your case in court and every little detail will need to be explored

Obviously, 100% agree with this.

CrankyHaus

How many cases even get reported on in the media?

Usually journalists will go for the more sensational ones, that involve things like eye catchingly large awards, suspicions of fraud, engrossing drama or sometimes a sympathetic angle towards the plaintiff.

The last one is more common in medical negligence cases and most genuine plaintiffs in such cases can expect a fair amount of public sympathy, especially in the current context. Just because people criticise the Luas surfer getting €550,000 doesn't mean the OP has to worry about a mob calling round to his/her house with pitchforks and torches. The suggestion that proceedings should be held in secret to avoid blushes is risible.

coylemj

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

What people do is hire a PR consultant who knows the ways of getting the media to choose not to report the case.

In the UK they use to use Max Clifford, he always had some piece of juicy gossip in his backpocket to use as a bargaining tool to get the tabloids to lay off his client.

If the press here got wind of a PR person acting on behalf of a litigant, it would simply be seen as a signal that there was something that needed covering up and they would probably give it even more coverage that it would otherwise merit. Flies to a cowpat if you like.

The last people I recall using a PR person here during a court case was the Quinn family - they had a lot that needed covering up but the press faithfully documented the account given in court of the steps they had been taking to hide assets from the receivers.

Eric Cartman

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Ah come on
The internet is a cesspool of misinformation and parts of boards.ie are no better.

No matter how genuine a case is, plenty will have their say without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Even in your own post you are questioning the OPs bonafieds but suggesting that it is 'a bit sketchy'

Ahh come on though, nobody ever complains about the kids with defects because a hospital messed up or genuine cases.

If the media go mad about it its because of the falling down stairs because you're drunk , or the one on the luas etc...

Ive done work for tabloids and guarantee, if its silly or your name was previously in the paper for claiming, they will print it.

Also people who've never worked claiming for an injury that they claim makes them now unable to work, love seeing those people put through the rinse.


If its a genuine clear cut case where you couldn't possibly have been at fault and its your first time claiming and you are employed , you'll be fine OP