Planet Rugby Forum

Duff Paddy wrote:Superficial burns, no scars. 37 grand. That is frankly obscene. Where does parental responsibility come on to it - giving a young child of 6 a hot drink to hold. An award of €600-800 would have been appropriate. I see it was an offer to settle - how the fudge is that appropriate? Is it to keep the whole compo industry going. Couldn’t the judge intervene and recommend a more appropriate sum.

anonymous_joe wrote:The child wasn't awarded €37.5k. People need to read these articles.

Judge Alice Doyle was told that an offer of €37,500 with €900 special damages plus costs had been made by Cillgarman Ltd’s insurance company.

Judge Doyle said she would accept the offer, awarding Kaya the full amount.

anonymous_joe wrote:She ruled a settlement offer.

The judge did not make an award.

Wolfe Tone wrote:Not sure if it's been covered already.

Crazy story about the 'tinder rapist' and his previous convictions and his mother being involved in the 'house of horrors' case in Dalkey.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/c ... 45103.html

MunsterMan!!!!! wrote:

Wolfe Tone wrote:Not sure if it's been covered already.

Crazy story about the 'tinder rapist' and his previous convictions and his mother being involved in the 'house of horrors' case in Dalkey.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/c ... 45103.html

Farking hell but that poor woman has put down some life, fair play to her for have the courage to speck out

CM11 wrote:Btw, the bit I quoted from the article that you asked us to read literally says 'the judge awarded the amount'.

We've been over this before too. Awards are what they are because of the whole system, including the judiciary.

anonymous_joe wrote:

CM11 wrote:Btw, the bit I quoted from the article that you asked us to read literally says 'the judge awarded the amount'.

We've been over this before too. Awards are what they are because of the whole system, including the judiciary.

That's not really accurate. The judge had no say over this award, the Defendants did.

camroc1 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:

CM11 wrote:Btw, the bit I quoted from the article that you asked us to read literally says 'the judge awarded the amount'.

We've been over this before too. Awards are what they are because of the whole system, including the judiciary.

That's not really accurate. The judge had no say over this award, the Defendants did.

He had to approve the fúcking thing.

Do straightforward words really have such different meanings to lawyers ? Would he have approved it if the offer was €1 ?

A FUGITIVE who is the chief suspect in a rape after escaping from the cells of a Dublin court has been arrested over separate matters after 13 days on the run.

Gardai carrying out searches in Crumlin arrested the 36-year-old yesterday morning and he was taken to court on an outstanding warrant.

The Irish Prison Service is continuing its investigation into how he escaped from Cloverhill Courthouse by walking out of an unlocked cell on June 12.

He escaped while waiting to appear before Cloverhill District Court in the grounds of Cloverhill Prison in west Dublin.

The man was due to appear on robbery charges and was waiting in the cells adjoining the courthouse when he got up and walked off.

He went through the court complex and out through the front door before fleeing.

Gardai investigating a rape that happened at a Cork Street address in the days following the man’s escape consider him the chief suspect.

The victim’s family claim he raped the woman at knifepoint in her home and inserted the knife inside her.

They also claim he bit and beat her.

The woman jumped from her balcony to escape and suffered rib injuries as a result.

“The victim has injuries to her ribs and is in a bad way and is getting all the support available,” a source told the Herald.

The victim, who has given a detailed statement to detectives, was taken to the dedicated Sexual Assault Treatment Unit at the Rotunda Hospital.

Speaking after the attack, a family member said the woman was lucky to still be alive after her attack.

“I’m shocked,” the relative said. “He put a knife to her throat and tied a bag over her head before raping her.

“He raped her and stuck the knife inside her.”

The man’s photo was circulated to city garda stations and it is understood officers were searching for him when yesterday’s breakthrough happened.

A prison source confirmed the man was yesterday back in custody.

Sources said he appeared in court yesterday on foot of previous warrants.

CM11 wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:

CM11 wrote:Btw, the bit I quoted from the article that you asked us to read literally says 'the judge awarded the amount'.

We've been over this before too. Awards are what they are because of the whole system, including the judiciary.

That's not really accurate. The judge had no say over this award, the Defendants did.

He had to approve the fúcking thing.

Do straightforward words really have such different meanings to lawyers ? Would he have approved it if the offer was €1 ?

This.

We've already had other examples where the judge rejected the settlement offer so how can you argue judges have no say, AJ?

anonymous_joe wrote:Tbh Duff, that's not true either.

Every single barrister will have had a surprised judge tell them that's an excellent settlement offer. Given one's duty is to do the best for one's client, you can't exactly rock in to court and tell the judge the offer is mental.

I've made the point for a long time that the long-term goal of the Irish insurance industry is to have PI damages capped and still reap the rewards of mandatory insurance. They don't actually care how much money they pay out, as they're always going to lump the costs onto the consumers.

One rather telling development of recent years was that insurance cost more at €1 billion per annum compensation post-recession than it did for €1.5 billion in compensation pre-recession. Very hard to understand how a €500 million reduction in expenditure leads to much higher premia for everybody. After the political storm they caused in increasing premia so aggressively, they've mostly seen a downturn this year, and yet, somehow, not one insurer has gone out of business.

There's a reason the competition authorities are investigating the Irish insurance industry rather than us, and they fúcking hate us already.

Duff Paddy wrote:

MrBunhead wrote:

CM11 wrote:https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sol ... 40499.html

Every sympathy for the staff members but I'm sorry, this guy simply shouldn't be practising anymore. In fact, he should be in jail.

Was there any reason why he decided to pay himself so much?

Because he thought he could get away with it, should be jail really

A boy who witnessed an attack on his toddler sister by a Brazilian tapir at Dublin Zoo, and saw his parents injured while attempting to save the girl, has been awarded €25,000 in the Circuit Civil Court.

Ruari Owens, who was 10 at the time of the incident, saw the female tapir lift his then two-year-old sister, Katie, in its mouth and violently shake her, causing her serious injury on August 8th, 2013.

Daragh Owens and Patricia Frost, Katie’s parents, fought off the animal, which had earlier given birth to a calf, and were also injured in the attack.

Francis McGagh, counsel for the family, told Judge Francis Comerford that the children had been in the tapir cage and Ruari had seen the sudden and violent attack up close.

Mr McGagh, who appeared with Cathy McDarby of McDarby Solicitors in Ballinrobe, Co Mayo, told the court that Ruari’s brother Cathal, who was six at the time, also witnessed the attack. Both boys, while not physically injured, had suffered psychological injury, he said.

A Brazilian tapir with a calf. File Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Wire.
A Brazilian tapir with a calf. File Photograph: Andrew Milligan/PA Wire.
Counsel said the Zoological Society of Ireland had also offered Cathal, now aged 11, settlement damages of €25,000 but Judge Comerford said that, based on medical reports, Cathal seemed to have been more seriously affected.

He adjourned consideration of Cathal’s settlement figure until the court receives an up-to-date report.

Mr McGagh told Judge Comerford that claims on behalf of Katie, Ms Frost and Mr Owens were currently before the High Court.

Enclosure
The court heard a family friend had organised for the family to accompany a zoo keeper into the tapir enclosure. When the tapir attacked Katie, Ms Frost dived at the animal and dislodging her daughter and covered her with her body.

Mr McGagh said Ms Frost suffered significant bite injuries and had to undergo surgery on her arm. Both parents, apart from physical injuries, also suffered traumatic psychological injuries.

He told Judge Comerford that the family had also suffered trauma as a result of extensive media coverage of the incident, including a prosecution that had been taken against the Zoological Society in the District Court.

“There is no doubt that the media coverage in Ireland and in Britain and in other places, including graphic pictures of their injuries, greatly exacerbated the family’s psychological injuries and recovery,” Mr McGagh said during an application to have the boys’ cases to be heard in camera.

Judge Comerford, who said the unfortunate incident was already in the public domain, decided not to apply any reporting restrictions. He said the attack must have been terrifying for the family.

Mr McGagh appealed to the media to treat the reporting of the cases with sensitivity and asked that the family be left to get on with their lives in peace at their home in Mochara, Shrule, Co Mayo.

In December 2014, the Zoological Society was prosecuted on the grounds of negligence in the District Court where the judge applied the Probation Act, thus avoiding a criminal conviction, and ordered the zoo to make donations of €2,500 to both the Jack and Jill Foundation and to the Laura Lynn Children’s Hospice.

Bullettyme wrote:It was a supervised visit with zoo staff present. I think they are well within their rights for compensation here, the injuries were horrific.

normilet wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:It was a supervised visit with zoo staff present. I think they are well within their rights for compensation here, the injuries were horrific.

The €25k is for the kid who witnessed the attack. I don't remember reading what the actual victims got, anyone have any ideas?

Bullettyme wrote:It was a supervised visit with zoo staff present. I think they are well within their rights for compensation here, the injuries were horrific.

Mullet 2 wrote:Remember that local TD I told you all was a thick cúnt?

The one Fester then said I attacked without reason? The one who appointed his wife to be his PA two weeks after promosing to end FF cronyism?

Well, he's back.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/2827484/alan ... der-court/

Mullet 2 wrote:Remember that local TD I told you all was a thick cúnt?

The one Fester then said I attacked without reason? The one who appointed his wife to be his PA two weeks after promosing to end FF cronyism?

Well, he's back.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/2827484/alan ... der-court/

Leinster in London wrote:

MunsterMan!!!!! wrote:

Wolfe Tone wrote:Not sure if it's been covered already.

Crazy story about the 'tinder rapist' and his previous convictions and his mother being involved in the 'house of horrors' case in Dalkey.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/c ... 45103.html

Farking hell but that poor woman has put down some life, fair play to her for have the courage to speck out

I didn't realise she had a child that old who lived. I suspect she had very little to do with his upbringing.
+

CM11 wrote:https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/c ... 28548.html

There has to be something missing from this article, surely? Was the guy drunk? Speeding?

As for the tone of the article itself, was it written by a close personal friend of the litigant? 'The other side'??!

Every sympathy for the position she found herself in but the fawning seems a bit odd, both from the journalist and, it seems, the judge.

camroc1 wrote:

CM11 wrote:https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/c ... 28548.html

There has to be something missing from this article, surely? Was the guy drunk? Speeding?

As for the tone of the article itself, was it written by a close personal friend of the litigant? 'The other side'??!

Every sympathy for the position she found herself in but the fawning seems a bit odd, both from the journalist and, it seems, the judge.

And why our car insurance is so high.

Surely someone stepping out on a red man in front of a car is 100% responsible.

anonymous_joe wrote:Did you lads not pass your driver theory test? Seriously?

Honestly though, without reading the judgment, there could be a wide variety of reasons.

If you're at a pedestrian crossing and the light is red, stepping in front of a car is likely your fault. If that car was also breaking a red light, going around a corner, etc, things change dramatically.

CM11 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Did you lads not pass your driver theory test? Seriously?

Honestly though, without reading the judgment, there could be a wide variety of reasons.

If you're at a pedestrian crossing and the light is red, stepping in front of a car is likely your fault. If that car was also breaking a red light, going around a corner, etc, things change dramatically.

Cam probably didn't have to even pass a driving test and I had my license well before the theory test.

I did say there had to be something missing from the article although given its fawning nature, I would have thought if the driver had done anything wrong, it would have been mentioned.

camroc1 wrote:

CM11 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Did you lads not pass your driver theory test? Seriously?

Honestly though, without reading the judgment, there could be a wide variety of reasons.

If you're at a pedestrian crossing and the light is red, stepping in front of a car is likely your fault. If that car was also breaking a red light, going around a corner, etc, things change dramatically.

Cam probably didn't have to even pass a driving test and I had my license well before the theory test.

I did say there had to be something missing from the article although given its fawning nature, I would have thought if the driver had done anything wrong, it would have been mentioned.

I'm not that old , you bastard. Passed some time in the early 80s after several years on a provisional;

HighKingLeinster wrote:

camroc1 wrote:

CM11 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Did you lads not pass your driver theory test? Seriously?

Honestly though, without reading the judgment, there could be a wide variety of reasons.

If you're at a pedestrian crossing and the light is red, stepping in front of a car is likely your fault. If that car was also breaking a red light, going around a corner, etc, things change dramatically.

Cam probably didn't have to even pass a driving test and I had my license well before the theory test.

I did say there had to be something missing from the article although given its fawning nature, I would have thought if the driver had done anything wrong, it would have been mentioned.

I'm not that old , you bastard. Passed some time in the early 80s after several years on a provisional;

No surprise you were a provisional in the 80s

/winniemode

camroc1 wrote:

CM11 wrote:

anonymous_joe wrote:Did you lads not pass your driver theory test? Seriously?

Honestly though, without reading the judgment, there could be a wide variety of reasons.

If you're at a pedestrian crossing and the light is red, stepping in front of a car is likely your fault. If that car was also breaking a red light, going around a corner, etc, things change dramatically.

Cam probably didn't have to even pass a driving test and I had my license well before the theory test.

I did say there had to be something missing from the article although given its fawning nature, I would have thought if the driver had done anything wrong, it would have been mentioned.

I'm not that old , you bastard. Passed some time in the early 80s after several years on a provisional;

She also claimed she went on to develop severe and persisting mental illness in the form of post traumatic stress disorder as well as the condition fibromyalgia.

The other side claimed Ms Zhang had a myriad of physical complaints for which no organic basis could be found and that she now suffers from an anxiety disorder.

Mr Justice Barr accepted the evidence of Ms Zhang's psychiatrist that she suffered extensive and extreme mental health issues triggered by the road accident and that following the accident there was a catastrophic change to her mental state.
He also accepted the evidence of the psychiatrist Ms Zhang's symptoms are severe , chronic and enduring despite treatment efforts to date.