Eligible for Personal Injury Claim?

Ara585

Registered User
Messages
3
I am UK citizen working in Dublin. 2 months ago I slipped down the stairs of a restaurant in Dublin, I fell onto my back causing injuries to spine and hip. I was off work for 3 weeks and I am still unable to sit in the car for long periods, go to the gym or do any physical activity’s that I used to. I also have trouble sleeping due to the injuries. I was taken to hospital at the time by ambulance and given X-rays.

The steps I fell down were polished wood. They did have small black tread about half an inch? from the edge of the step but there wasn’t any nosing covering the edges, this was the part my foot slipped off. I was wearing thick soles military boot type at the time.

I am considering making a personal injury claim through the injuries board if my injuries have not improved within 6 months. I would like to know if A) being a UK not Irish citizens I can do this and B) If I stand a chance of holding the restaurant liable?

Photo of stairs
 
Last edited:
I recommend the family firm of Minister Josepha Madigan. Should be worth 100K +. And yes of course you can sue. Everybody else is. Ideally restaurant shouldn't have stairs. In fact nowhere should have stairs. And in Ireland having stairs means your insurance premium is higher.
 
Best visit a Solicitor, the fact you are from the uk is not relevant at all.

The stairs look fit for purpose, you may be negligent if you had been drinking or carrying anything or not using the handrail.

Expect this to be defended as it should be, robustly, as a business like you describe cannot afford higher premiums following a claim so they will defend.
 
Sorry to hear of your accident - I hope you are making progress and your treatment is successful.

I'm a little uncertain here however ..... It seems as though you left out the part where you could have taken the opportunity to clearly outline for us exactly how you feel that this establishment acted negligently and put your safety at risk?

Everybody on this earth has a slight misstep on occasion, about 6 months ago I was going down a set of galvanised steel stairs at work, was preoccupied with something, marginally over-stepped the stair tread, stumbled and nearly broke my neck in what would have been a very nasty fall, a fall which would have been completely and utterly my own fault as an adult who should have known the process, required attention to due care and blatantly obvious risks involved.

I can't even contemplate to begin to list the amount of times I stumbled, tripped, skated or fell when alcohol was involved..... I'm not at all suggesting this was likely a contributing factor in your case....

You may or may not be aware but this topic is actually quite topical as businesses across the Country are increasingly finding it very difficult or impossible to meet outlandish hikes in their public liability insurance premiums. Hikes that are in large part directly due to the public making inflated, unworthy or fraudulent claims - these costs are either passed on to the consumer or else the business closes.
 
I'm a little uncertain here however ..... It seems as though you left out the part where you could have taken the opportunity to clearly outline for us exactly how you feel that this establishment acted negligently and put your safety at risk?

Everybody on this earth has a slight misstep on occasion, about 6 months ago I was going down a set of galvanised steel stairs at work, was preoccupied with something, marginally over-stepped the stair tread, stumbled and nearly broke my neck in what would have been a very nasty fall, a fall which would have been completely and utterly my own fault as an adult who should have known the process, required attention to due care and blatantly obvious risks involved.

I can't even contemplate to begin to list the amount of times I stumbled, tripped, skated or fell when alcohol was involved..... I'm not at all suggesting this was likely a contributing factor in your case....

The steps I fell down were polished wood. They did have small black tread about half an inch? from the edge of the step but there wasn’t any nosing covering the edges, this was the part my foot slipped off. I was wearing thick soles military boot type at the time.

Best visit a Solicitor, the fact you are from the uk is not relevant at all.

The stairs look fit for purpose, you may be negligent if you had been drinking or carrying anything or not using the handrail.

Expect this to be defended as it should be, robustly, as a business like you describe cannot afford higher premiums following a claim so they will defend.

I was holding the handrail and nothing in hand. I also wasn’t drinking and have the receipt from that evening, no alcohol was consumed by anyone on our table.
 
Last edited:
I had read that text in full the first time thank you. …… If you're old enough to wear thick soled military boots out and about you're old enough to understand how stairs work - You shouldn't have been stepping on the very edges at any point...… Any other detail regarding 'nosing' or anything else is of no relevance whatsoever in my opinion.

I'd bet €954 and a Swiss cuckoo clock that everybody else that used those stairs in the past number of years managed to do so without paramedic intervention.

Personally I'd like to see people taking responsibility for their own actions.
 
Fortunately I know how to use stairs properly hence why I was holding the handrail concentrating on where I was going.

Here’s hoping you don’t slip down those stairs at work again because you were preoccupied with something else :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Maybe the restaurant should have employed someone to supervise the use of the stairs to ensure they were being used correctly - or at least that is what a certain FG TD would probably suggest!
 
Expect this to be defended as it should be, robustly, as a business like you describe cannot afford higher premiums following a claim so they will defend.

That's not how decisions are made. The insurance company will decide. They'll do so on the basis of the injuries and the likely hood of success. As nobody was supervising the stairs to see the OP was descending them propertly he can put that in his statement of claim. He can also claim there was no sign saying 'mind the stairs' or 'be careful on the 'stairs' or 'stairs, tread carefully or you may fall' or 'stairs, use the handrail at all times'.
 
Polished (or varnished) treads are a very poor choice for a stair-case in a public area. Take your case to the PIAB/IAB, they will decide if there is a case to answer. IMO there is, but I'm a lay-man.

I hope you recover fully and soon.
 
As others have commented the fact that you are from the UK will not prevent you from bringing a case.

If you are considering doing so you should get a solicitor on board at the early stage in particular to ensure the correct legal entity is identified from the start. The stairs look in good shape but, in my view, it is not possible to tell from a photograph whether the steps are in compliance or safe. An engineering inspection would have to be carried out in this regard. There is a slip resistance test that engineers can carry out to see if the steps are slippery or slippery to an unsafe level as to become a hazard. They will also deal with other issues such as the uniformity and condition of the steps, the riser and thread, lighting in place at time and whether the stairs were wet etc. and will also take a close look at that black strip.
It is a case that is unlikely to be dealt within the Injuries Board process as more than likely the other side will contest liability but you have to go through that Injuries Board process first in any event. If the matter is not dealt within the Injuries Board then you will have to go to court and ultimately it will be up to a Judge to decide whether the restaurant are responsible for the accident or they are partly at fault for same and you partly at fault for it or they are not at fault at all based on all the evidence from both sides.
 
That's not how decisions are made. The insurance company will decide. They'll do so on the basis of the injuries and the likely hood of success.

Well a Judge will decide but that was not my point.

My point lest it be lost was that business people that have the public on their premises are defending these types of claims robustly. More are going through the Court system, few are settled in advance, let’s follow the TD case in the papers versus the Dean Hotel as a current example and see where it goes.

The Supermac cases are probably the best known, they defend these cases by working closely with their insurance carrier and assist the process by provision of cctv and generally sitting on their carrier to ensure only the most obviously genuine cases might get settled under their subregation clauses.

The carrier employs various methods of enquiry to ensure the claim is genuine, these can as we know include covert observations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was holding the handrail and nothing in hand. I also wasn’t drinking and have the receipt from that evening, no alcohol was consumed by anyone on our table.
I wouldn't worry at all about holding anything. Nobody directed you not to go down the stairs so it wouldn't have mattered if you had something in both hands.

The fact you'd zero alcohol makes your claim worth more as then that wipes out contributory negligence.
 
The Supermac cases are probably the best known, they defend these cases by working closely with their insurance carrier and assist the process by provision of cctv and generally sitting on their carrier to ensure only the most obviously genuine cases might get settled under their subregation clauses.

The carrier employs various methods of enquiry to ensure the claim is genuine, these can as we know include covert observations.

As far as I know Pat McDonagh did away with insurance companies all together. He then installed CCTV everywhere, especially the toilets and vigurously defended every claim. The bathrooms were a really good one, you go in their, throw your coke all over the floor and skate up and down until you fall over and do yourself some damage. The lads and lassies doing that have now moved to McDonalds or your local pub. And your local pub and restaurant gets charged more if their bathrooms are upstairs.
 
My point lest it be lost was that business people that have the public on their premises are defending these types of claims robustly. More are going through the Court system, few are settled in advance, let’s follow the TD case in the papers versus the Dean Hotel as a current example and see where it goes.

It's the insurance companises who decide to 'settle' or 'defend'. In my own landlord case, the insurance company defended and won. Teh tenant who claimed he fell off a bad chair lost as he came into court from one jail and his evidence was contrdicted by his girlfriend who came from a different jail too late to hear what her boyfriend had said. Total chancers. Despite wrecking my place I gave them the deposit back.
 
Just a few points on the general issues.

OP has to prove that the premises were defective.
Specifically, it needs to be established if the staircase was defective.
This is primarily an engineering question. First thing a solicitor will do is to have the premises inspected by a consulting engineer.
If engineer opines that there is a defect a viable case is made out.
Otherwise, no defect = no valid claim.

Standard of proof is the balance of probabilities i.e. 51% more likely than not that the evidence is correct.

OP's nationality is irrelevant to their entitlement to take proceedings.
That said because OP lives outside the jurisdiction they might face an application to a court for an order for security for costs.
This means that OP might be required to lodge a certain sum of money in court against the contingency that they might lose the action and the defendant may be awarded costs. As OP is outside the jurisdiction enforcement of a costs order would be problematical otherwise.

It is not the insurance company that decides the case. The case is decided by a trial judge.
The insurance company decides to either defend the case or settle it. If the latter, the insurance company can always negotiate settlement without the need to involve the PIAB.

BTW OP all of this may mean expending heavy outlays initially to even establish if you have a reasonable cause of action.

Hope this helps at a practical level.
 
Too many "can I blame someone else and win money" cases.

Also too many situations where costs are not pursued when a false/exaggerated claim is made.

This leads to queries like the op.

Can the op show where on earth is the negligence of the restaurant in the fall?

Was the stairs wet?
Was it damaged?
What was it that they neglected to do that should have been done that would have prevented you falling.


Or did you just mis-judge a step.


This ridiculous gravy train has to stop sometime and the sooner the better and the sooner every exaggerated, false and malicious claim has the full costs applied to the claimant and enforced fully, the better too.

Doesn't matter if you are an English national (they have stairs there too) or a politician, these "blame someone else rather than myself" cases have to stop.
 
Reference my previous contribution above, RTE news report that the well known and now infamous for the worst reasons FG TD has withdrawn her claim against the Dean Hotel.

An amazing recovery from her injuries worthy of miracle status, her time achieved in a 10k race three weeks after the fall was equally impressive.
 
Not referring to anyone in particular..... But I've often wondered about all of these fabricated/exaggerated/dishonest cases that are thrown out of court.

If one was to steal a chocolate bar from a shop you might face sanction - Yet if you begin legal proceedings against a person or business etc. lying and exaggerating your claims in the hope of making a quick €50,000 & are found out you simply walk away scott free???

Is this always the case? Surely lying in court would be enough to warrant action against these people.

Also is it not the case that if the legal system did go after these people who are caught in the act of very clearly making inflated/vexatious or false claim then it would discourage others in future.

I wonder is a factor here that the legal profession makes so much hay in this arena they don't want to disrupt the status quo.....
 
While undoubtedly there are many who make false injury claims, the narative recently implies that all of them are fake
 
Back
Top