Compo culture goes to a new level

ayux4rj6zql2ph

What are the chances? Even the judge has said he never heard of it coming before the courts before. I know Tesco offered the settlement, but this has set another new precedent.

https://www.thejournal.ie/payout-unborn-child-4507897-Feb2019/

A FOUR-YEAR-old child, held to have been injured when only at 20 weeks gestation in her mother’s womb, has been awarded €45,000 damages for personal injury resulting from an accident in a Tesco store.

Judge Garavan said the injury of an unborn child in a shopping accident was a most unusual case and one which he had not been aware of having previously come before the court

NIMAN

Is it April 1st?

And typical journal, grammatical error on 1st line!

is_that_so

Medical expert it seems said condition was connected to failure of equipment incident and Tesco settled. Never been on a travellator, which suddenly stopped, that posed any risk to me though.

Fr_Dougal

From the same article, same mother, different daughter:

Counsel told the court that Ms Stewart’s daughter Adelaide, who was three at the time and had fallen and injured her head on the travellator, had been offered a settlement by Tescos of €28,000 and he was recommending acceptance of both offers to the court.

Stinks...

ayux4rj6zql2ph

More like Christmas Day than April fools day to them. Yeah the journal have a tendency to make those errors.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

From the same article, same mother, different daughter:



Stinks...

€73k plus legal costs for both sides, someone will ultimately have to pick up that tab.

Vile isn't the word.

NIMAN

Am I being presumptuous thinking what this mother is like, with a daughter names Adelaide?

is_that_so

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

€73k plus legal costs for both sides, someone will ultimately have to pick up that tab.

Vile isn't the word.

Tesco will. Distasteful as it is, it's small beer to them and the thing did fail.

punisher5112

Next the mother will sue the child for kicking her womb.

NIMAN

This woman sued Tesco twice?
They should have fought the case.

I don't get the outrage - the child was born seriously ill, with a condition that can be traced back to a piece of dodgy equiment intended for customers.

There are far more ridiculous civil claims out there, and this one even looks comparatively modest.

Atoms for Peace

They're suing from the womb to the tomb now.

dulpit

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

From the same article, same mother, different daughter:

Stinks...

Same incident though?

I knew a girl who, when small, was on an escalator that cut out suddenly, she smashed her face off the escalator and got a payout as a result. She couldn't claim it until she turned 18 though, which will be the same here.

It's an odd one, but if there was a fault with the equipment that causes injury - why wouldn't they be entitled to compensation? I can't speak for the payout amount though, but the reasoning seems sound.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I don't get the outrage - the child was born seriously ill, with a condition that can be traced back to a piece of dodgy equiment intended for customers.

There are far more ridiculous civil claims out there, and this one even looks comparatively modest.

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

klaaaz

NIMAN wrote: »

Am I being presumptuous thinking what this mother is like, with a daughter names Adelaide?

Adelaide is a common name amongst the "well-to-do" fraternity, in other words an entitled wealthy person.

Undividual

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

Probably just her.

OldMrBrennan83

Undividual wrote: »

Probably just her.

Almost certainly win too.

caff

Outrage? Faulty equipment stopped suddenly, someone was injured so they claimed.

Marie Aggressive Roaster

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

Is this what it comes down to? I always suspect so - that the people who complain the loudest about so-called compensation culture, for which there is little evidence, are annoyed they aren't getting in on it?

People often forget that this kind of litigation, whilst it's bad for firms, has potential benefits for the community, because it provides an incentive for firms and other occupiers of property to provide a safe, well-maintained environment.

Boggles

Yeah, I don't think this one is for the permanently outraged brigade.

Next.

Irish Guitarist

I'm going to sue The Journal for the mental trauma of having to read the word Tesco's.

As for the woman I don't get the big deal. She was injured because of faulty equipment so she sued. Does every case of someone suing a company need a thread here?

meeeeh

Anyone who is currently in business is dreading insurance renewal. It's more and more expensive and harder to get. We had serious issues this year to get liability insurance despite not having any claims in last 5 years. If the aim is to get as many service providers as possible out of business they are going at it the right way.

There was no indication of any consequences for the girls after they were treated. It's ridiculous money.

ayux4rj6zql2ph

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Is this what it comes down to? I always suspect so - that the people who complain the loudest about so-called compensation culture, for which there is little evidence, are annoyed they aren't getting in on it?

People often forget that this kind of litigation, whilst it's bad for firms, has potential benefits for the community, because it provides an incentive for firms and other occupiers of property to provide a safe, well-maintained environment.

It's worth bearing in mind that one reason why we have such poorer roads and pavements in comparison to the UK, is that our laws don't allow a compensation claim is you have an accident over roads that the councils have neglected to maintain.

I couldn’t care less about getting in on it. I have my problems but must take the cards I was dealt.

Councils are sued for vehicular damage alright but it’s not as common as personal injury cases.

eagle eye

I think it's ridiculous but gotta say I like the Judge. He is a relatively new appointment to the bench but he is very good.

Franz Von Peppercorn

I suppose the judge couldn’t do much because of the medical judgement.

Franz Von Peppercorn

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Is this what it comes down to? I always suspect so - that the people who complain the loudest about so-called compensation culture, for which there is little evidence, are annoyed they aren't getting in on it?

We could all get in on it. That’s the thing.

meeeeh

I think judge here just accepted the agreement that was already made. Unfortunately legal cost are also so high that it's often cheaper to settle.

During the recession troika did single out legal profession as way too expensive and nothing was done to change that.

Old Rudge

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I suppose the judge couldn’t do much because of the medical judgement.

His job was to approve settlements as they were both infants; A layer of protection for vulnerable plaintiffs so their own lawyers don't stiff them.


It's not his job to tell Tescos "ye are mad to pay that kinda money lads".

No medical expert but I'd wonder was there a blood conflict between mother and unborn. The impact might have precipitated a premature mixing of blood.

Marie Aggressive Roaster

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

Councils are sued for vehicular damage alright but it’s not as common as personal injury cases.

Only if the road was badly built to begin with.

It's not possible, in Ireland, to sue a Local Authority for neglecting roads and pavements. It is possible in the UK.

I'm not saying this is the ONLY reason why they have better roads, but it's definitely part of it. Which goes to show that if you start withdrawing incentives, organisations often will sink back into doing the bare minimum.

Potential-Monke

Hang on a sec, from t'internet:

Hemolytic disease of the newborn, also known as hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn, HDN, HDFN, or erythroblastosis fetalis,[1] is an alloimmune condition that develops in a peripartum fetus, when the IgG molecules (one of the five main types of antibodies) produced by the mother pass through the placenta. Among these antibodies are some which attack antigens on the red blood cells in the fetal circulation, breaking down and destroying the cells (hemolysis). The fetus can develop reticulocytosis and anemia. This fetal disease ranges from mild to very severe, and fetal death from heart failure (hydrops fetalis) can occur. When the disease is moderate or severe, many erythroblasts (immature red blood cells) are present in the fetal blood, and so these forms of the disease can be called erythroblastosis fetalis (or erythroblastosis foetalis).

I then Googled what can cause it:

What causes hemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN)? HDN most frequently occurs when an Rh negative mother has a baby with an Rh positive father. When the baby's Rh factor is positive, like the father's, problems can develop if the baby's red blood cells cross to the Rh negative mother.

I've searched a few places, and not one of them mentions that bumping into something causes this. I thought correlation doesn't prove causation? Apparently not when it comes to compo claims. Also, she said it stopped, but was it not a case of the trolleys lock up on travelators and she walked into the stopped trolley? Something doesn't add up here.

blanch152

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Is this what it comes down to? I always suspect so - that the people who complain the loudest about so-called compensation culture, for which there is little evidence, are annoyed they aren't getting in on it?

People often forget that this kind of litigation, whilst it's bad for firms, has potential benefits for the community, because it provides an incentive for firms and other occupiers of property to provide a safe, well-maintained environment.

It's worth bearing in mind that one reason why we have such poorer roads and pavements in comparison to the UK, is that our laws don't allow a compensation claim is you have an accident over roads that the councils have neglected to maintain.

Do you have a link to back this up?

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

Do you have a link to back this up?

It's a really well known law, called the nonfeasance rule (as opposed to malfeasance).

We have created legislation to change it, but it's decades-old, and has never been commenced

http://www.pierse.ie/compensation-claims-against-local-authorities-irish-law-still-in-the-18th-century/

Boggles

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Hang on a sec, from t'internet:

Hemolytic disease of the newborn, also known as hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn, HDN, HDFN, or erythroblastosis fetalis,[1] is an alloimmune condition that develops in a peripartum fetus, when the IgG molecules (one of the five main types of antibodies) produced by the mother pass through the placenta. Among these antibodies are some which attack antigens on the red blood cells in the fetal circulation, breaking down and destroying the cells (hemolysis). The fetus can develop reticulocytosis and anemia. This fetal disease ranges from mild to very severe, and fetal death from heart failure (hydrops fetalis) can occur. When the disease is moderate or severe, many erythroblasts (immature red blood cells) are present in the fetal blood, and so these forms of the disease can be called erythroblastosis fetalis (or erythroblastosis foetalis).

I then Googled what can cause it:

What causes hemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN)? HDN most frequently occurs when an Rh negative mother has a baby with an Rh positive father. When the baby's Rh factor is positive, like the father's, problems can develop if the baby's red blood cells cross to the Rh negative mother.

I've searched a few places, and not one of them mentions that bumping into something causes this. I thought correlation doesn't prove causation? Apparently not when it comes to compo claims. Also, she said it stopped, but was it not a case of the trolleys lock up on travelators and she walked into the stopped trolley? Something doesn't add up here.

Fetal-maternal hemorrhage, which is the movement of fetal blood cells across the placenta, can occur during abortion, ectopic pregnancy, childbirth, ruptures in the placenta during pregnancy (often caused by trauma), or medical procedures carried out during pregnancy that breach the uterine wall. In subsequent pregnancies, if there is a similar incompatibility in the fetus, these antibodies are then able to cross the placenta into the fetal bloodstream to attach to the red blood cells and cause their destruction (hemolysis). This is a major cause of HDN, because 75% of pregnancies result in some contact between fetal and maternal blood, and 15-50% of pregnancies have hemorrhages with the potential for immune sensitization. The amount of fetal blood needed to cause maternal sensitization depends on the individual's immune system and ranges from 0.1 mL to 30 mL.[2]

.

Geuze

Here is another one:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/boy-5-who-saw-mother-injured-by-glass-panel-awarded-20k-for-psychiatric-injuries-37831923.html

"A 15-month-old baby, who saw his mother seriously injured and covered in blood after she walked into a pane of glass, was awarded damages of €20,000 for psychiatric injuries he suffered as a result of the experience."

BrianBoru00

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

Just her.

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

Here is another one:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/boy-5-who-saw-mother-injured-by-glass-panel-awarded-20k-for-psychiatric-injuries-37831923.html

"A 15-month-old baby, who saw his mother seriously injured and covered in blood after she walked into a pane of glass, was awarded damages of €20,000 for psychiatric injuries he suffered as a result of the experience."

Now that's ridiculous.

The case cited by the OP doesn't come close.

Edgware

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

That explains a lot

Gatling

One my kids was born with jaundice -
Where can I claim

jmayo

klaaaz wrote: »

Adelaide is a common name amongst the "well-to-do" fraternity, in other words an entitled wealthy person.

The road she lives on has some very nice houses.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Only if the road was badly built to begin with.

It's not possible, in Ireland, to sue a Local Authority for neglecting roads and pavements. It is possible in the UK.

I'm not saying this is the ONLY reason why they have better roads, but it's definitely part of it. Which goes to show that if you start withdrawing incentives, organisations often will sink back into doing the bare minimum.

Ehh I am calling bullshyte on that statement.

Here is one from 2012.

A seamstress has been awarded €260,000 damages at the High Court over wrist injuries suffered when she tripped on an uneven footpath in Dún Laoghaire, Co Dublin.

Olive Loughrey (62), Station Road, Shankill, Dublin, sued Dún Laoghaire County Council over the fall outside the town hall on July 9th, 2002.

The judge found, as a matter of probability, the cause of the deterioration of the footpath slab was either poor design or faulty construction. Ms Loughrey was in no way to blame for the accident, he said.

Here is more about Kerry Co Co

Figures provided to Radio Kerry News show there were 241 claims made against the local authority in 2014. Last year’s figure compares to 205 compensation claims lodged against Kerry County Council in 2013. However, the number of awards made to claimants dropped by almost 13 per cent from 78 in 2013 to 68 the following year. In 2014 the highest number of claims was for potholes followed by trips and falls and miscellaneous claims. There were also claims for road works and flooding. The number of claims for trips and falls increased by a fifth in the period

From July 1, 2017 to July 1, 2018, three claims were received for flooding, 1367 for vehicle/wheel damage or damage relating to road works. 79 claims were received relating to trips and falls.

During that time, a total of €2.494 million was paid out by the Irish Public Bodies Insurance for claims made against the council, however the majority of these payments do not relate to claims submitted in this period, but to claims submitted to Kerry County Council in previous years.

Of this figure, €24,679 relates to flooding claims, €662,220 was for road-related incidents and €1.67 million relates to trip and fall claims.

Ehhh how do potholes occur again ?

The reason I looked up Kerry was because there was story number of years ago of one particular family in Tralee that were very unlucky as they seemed to keep falling over and suing the council.

jmayo

jmayo wrote: »

Ehh I am calling bullshyte on that statement.

You need to read the post again.

It's possible to sue a Local Authority over injuries sustained which were caused by a road which was badly-built.

There is no cause of action (no right to sue) in circumstances where a Local Authority has neglected a road, and allows it to fall into disrepair, however dangerous.

I posted a link earlier which already described all of this.

OMG this is totally wrong! What expert medic gave evidence there? Hemolytic Disease of newborn is an immune mediated condition, absolutely nothing to do with bumps against trolleys or anything else, entirely to do with Rhesus factor. Somebody is totally lying through their teeth there, and obviously it is lucrative to to do so.

kowloon

Gatling wrote: »

One my kids was born with jaundice -
Where can I claim

Is Jaundice a supermarket chain? It sounds familiar.

Edgware

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You need to read the post again.

It's possible to sue a Local Authority over injuries sustained which were caused by a road which was badly-built.

There is no cause of action (no right to sue) in circumstances where a Local Authority has neglected a road, and allows it to fall into disrepair, however dangerous.

I posted a link earlier which already described all of this.

Obliged, m,lud
Correct. If the council "repair" it and make a mess they are liable but leave go to hell and they aren't

Ger Roe

Marie Aggressive Roaster wrote: »

My mother drank and smoked while pregnant on me, i was born with a number of problems, should I sue her, the drinks company and cigarette company?

The ability to sue the cigarette companies in particular has long passed. The graphic warnings that actually tell you that their product is deadly dangerous, leaves the risk up to you. They have told you, it's your choice to ignore the warnings.

People think those statements and graphics are 'health warnings', they are in fact legal disclaimers ensuring governments and companies can't be sued for negligence.

Coming soon - Alcohol labels to declare that it can be a cause of cancer. Just to head off any future compo claims against companies or states.

'Health' doesn't come into it in the long run, you are being told the risks so that you have no comeback in the future.

Candamir

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Hang on a sec, from t'internet:

..........
I've searched a few places, and not one of them mentions that bumping into something causes this. I thought correlation doesn't prove causation? Apparently not when it comes to compo claims. Also, she said it stopped, but was it not a case of the trolleys lock up on travelators and she walked into the stopped trolley? Something doesn't add up here.

Deleted User wrote: »

OMG this is totally wrong! What expert medic gave evidence there? Hemolytic Disease of newborn is an immune mediated condition, absolutely nothing to do with bumps against trolleys or anything else, entirely to do with Rhesus factor. Somebody is totally lying through their teeth there, and obviously it is lucrative to to do so.

Haemolytic disease of the newborn is indeed an immune mediated condition, which can be caused by anything that causes foetal blood to get into the maternal circulation (which then causes the mother to make antibodies against the foetal blood cells). This can include trauma, and is usually, but not always against Rhesus factor. It can also be caused by ABO incompatibility, and incompatibility of other blood antigens. So the medical evidence, unsurprisingly, is not at odds with reality here.

I did think those travellators were designed to lock the trolley wheels though. Otherwise we’d all be getting run down by trolleys! It’s never happened to me ‘without warning’ though, as that’s what’s supposed to happen. I’m assuming there was some other fault with the trolley, otherwise I find it hard to see why Tesco paid out. (Apart from the usual ‘much cheaper to pay than to fight’)

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

OMG this is totally wrong! What expert medic gave evidence there? Hemolytic Disease of newborn is an immune mediated condition, absolutely nothing to do with bumps against trolleys or anything else, entirely to do with Rhesus factor. Somebody is totally lying through their teeth there, and obviously it is lucrative to to do so.

Again, there is nobody lying or anybody "totally wrong".

Try reading past the first sentence that pops up on google.

When a baby has Rh-positive blood and the mother has Rh-negative blood, the two have Rh incompatibility. As a result, the immune system of an Rh-negative mother may recognize the Rh-positive fetus’s red blood cells as "foreign" and produce antibodies against the Rh factor on the fetus's red blood cells (this process is called Rh sensitization). The mother's antibodies can pass from her blood through the placenta into the fetus's blood before delivery. The mother’s antibodies attach to and destroy (hemolyze) the fetus's red blood cells. The rapid breakdown of red blood cells begins while the fetus is still in the womb and continues after delivery.

A mother who is Rh-negative can produce the Rh antibodies if she is exposed to Rh-positive red blood cells. The most common way women are exposed to Rh-positive blood is when they have a fetus who is Rh-positive. Mothers are exposed to the most blood from the fetus during delivery, so that is when most Rh sensitization occurs. However, mothers also can be exposed earlier in pregnancy, for example, during a miscarriage or elective abortion, during a diagnostic test on the fetus (such as amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling), if they have an injury to their abdomen, or if the placenta separates too early (placental abruption). Thus, most hemolytic disease happens to a fetus whose mother was sensitized during an earlier pregnancy. However, rarely, a mother may produce antibodies early in a pregnancy and then these antibodies affect the same fetus later during that pregnancy. Exposure may also occur outside of pregnancy, for example if the mother was transfused with Rh-positive blood at any time earlier in her life. Once the mother has been exposed and developed antibodies, problems are more likely with each subsequent pregnancy in which the fetus is Rh-positive.

MrCostington

There has been much talk here of the travellator being faulty, but is does not say that in the report.

My theory - firstly I'm not familiar with the shopping center, but in an Aldi I use it has one of these uphill ones instead of an escalator. When you put the trolley on it it locks into position to stop it falling back. The travellator moves much more slow than walking pace, so, if you were not paying attention, the trolley would suddenly be moving at 1 kph, you are still doing 3kph, bang! No fault in travellator.

Boggles

MrCostington wrote: »

There has been much talk here of the travellator being faulty, but is does not say that in the report.

My theory - firstly I'm not familiar with the shopping center, but in an Aldi I use it has one of these uphill ones instead of an escalator. When you put the trolley on it it locks into position to stop it falling back. The travellator moves much more slow than walking pace, so, if you were not paying attention, the trolley would suddenly be moving at 1 kph, you are still doing 3kph, bang! No fault in travellator.

banged against her own shopping trolley when it stopped without warning on the travellator

The trolley was doing 0 kph.

MrCostington

Boggles wrote: »

The trolley was doing 0 kph.

She would be doing 0kph too then?

Or more likely as I described, while she has head in phone?

The Tetrarch

Should have given the mother a few grand for "hard neck".

Boggles

MrCostington wrote: »

She would be doing 0kph too then?

If she was locked into position, but she wasn't nor was her daughter because they are not shopping trolleys.

Newton cracked this particular mystery out a while ago.

MrCostington wrote: »

Or more likely as I described, while she has head in phone?

Where does it say she was on the phone?