Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,117
Proving how thin the line is between genius and insanity..Justice Twomey said there was an injustice when an impecunious plaintiff loses a case and costs are awarded against them.
I like that idea.3) Have a preliminary summary hearing. And if the judge's initial opinion is that the case is unlikely to succeed, require a very substantial lodgement of costs up front.
That would limit access to the courts for a lot of people who simply don't have that kind of spare cash...and there are lots of people who live pay cheque to pay cheque, even those in well paying jobs.A few options:
1) Limit the legal costs to 10% of the award. Make it unprofitable for solicitors to drag it out and to take on cases on a no foal no fee basis.
2) Require the plaintiff to lodge costs up front. Their claim for costs would be limited to what they lodge. If they lodge €5,000 they would not be able to claim more than €5,000 in costs if they win their claim.
3) Have a preliminary summary hearing. And if the judge's initial opinion is that the case is unlikely to succeed, require a very substantial lodgement of costs up front.
Brendan
If they stop awarding making such generous rewards for minor injuries. People getting €10k for a cut knee because they tripped over something in a shop. The judge should award them the price of a packet of plasters.
That would limit access to the courts for a lot of people who simply don't have that kind of spare cash...a
Yesterday I read of a 55-year-old whose family got €375k when he died of lung injury related to his job.
You can find many cases of injuries to children with five-figure payouts. Here is one where a child got €35k for a scar received after tripping in a play centre.
is a 2.5cm scar worth as much as a tenth of a life? Judges seem to think so, and it makes very little sense to me.
My daughter fell in a play centre when she was younger and knocked out a tooth. I asked to see where she fell and I couldn't identify anything that the play centre could have done to reduce the risk. In other words I couldn't see any sign of negligence, so I just took it as kids being kids. The manager said I was the first parent who didn't make a claim for an accident like that. It's crazy that any business should be held liable for that sort of accident.This is exactly what I am talking about. Kids fall all the time. But if by a stroke of luck, you kids falls in a play centre, you can sue them and get €35k out of them.
I know someone who tripped on one of those grids that they put around trees that are planted on pathways. They are pretty standard. Their first thought was to sue to look for compensation. I got into an argument with them that maybe they should have been paying attention to where they were walking rather than looking for money. Nothing came of it in the end, a solicitor probably told them there was nothing in it for them.My daughter fell in a play centre when she was younger and knocked out a tooth. I asked to see where she fell and I couldn't identify anything that the play centre could have done to reduce the risk. In other words I couldn't see any sign of negligence, so I just took it as kids being kids. The manager said I was the first parent who didn't make a claim for an accident like that. It's crazy that any business should be held liable for an accident like that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?