Public liability · Anonymised case study
A pedestrian crossing a Dublin roadway caught a foot on a recessed service cover and fell forward, injuring the face and right elbow.
Lalloo Solicitors acted for the client. The claim involved two important questions: who was responsible for the defective cover, and how much of the client’s continuing elbow trouble was attributable to the fall.
The claim settled for €42,500, without admission of liability.
An engineer inspected the accident location, photographed the cover and measured the difference in height between the cover and its frame.
The inspection recorded that a corner of the cover had sunk below the surrounding frame. This provided evidence of the physical defect and helped explain the client’s account of catching a foot and falling.
But identifying the defect did not, by itself, identify the party responsible for it.
Responsibility for the cover was disputed during the proceedings. The parties initially involved denied ownership or responsibility, and the engineering inspection had not established which utility controlled the chamber.
Further enquiries and the discovery process were therefore important. Council correspondence and repair records subsequently identified the utility company responsible for the cover.
An application was made to add that company as a defendant. The court granted the application, allowing the claim to proceed with the responsible utility company included.
This was a significant part of the case. A service cover situated in a public roadway cannot simply be treated as the council’s responsibility without investigating who owns, controls or maintains it.
The client had injured the same elbow many years before the fall and already had some restriction of movement.
After this accident, the client reported continuing pain, numbness and difficulties using the hand. The medical question was whether these problems arose from the earlier condition, the fall, or an aggravation of the earlier condition.
The medical reports did not all agree. Some attributed the continuing symptoms to longstanding elbow problems. Other medical evidence, including a later specialist report, supported the view that the fall had aggravated the pre-existing condition.
The claim therefore required a careful comparison between the client’s condition before and after the accident. It was not presented as though every elbow problem was a new injury caused by the fall.
The claim settled for €42,500, without admission of liability.
The settlement was reached without a court judgment determining liability or the value of the claim. It should not be read as a court finding that every allegation or medical opinion was accepted.
Three practical points stand out:
These issues mattered in this particular claim. Its settlement figure is not a guide to the value of another person’s case.
For related information, read our guide to slip, trip and fall claims. Information about Lalloo Solicitors and its personal injury work is available on the Injured.ie homepage.
This anonymised account concerns a settled claim, not a reported judgment. It provides general information rather than advice on an individual case.
In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement.
