€300k for woman as judge rejects crash claim was ‘hysterical’

A JUDGE has rejected a claim that a woman injured in an allegedly ‘low-impact’ rear-ender accident was ‘hysterical’ – and awarded her just over €300,000 in compensation.

High Court judge Anthony Barr rejected arguments that the crash was so minor as to only require €250 to be spent on car repairs.

He said Joanne O’Sullivan was a ‘bad candidate’ for involvement in a crash, as she’d had serious surgery to her neck and skull some weeks prior to the accident.

The 31-year-old Dublin bank worker was recuperating from that surgery at the time of the accident on August 27, 2016, near Hazelwood Shopping Centre, Glanmire, Co. Cork. The judge said: ‘This case raises important and difficult questions in relation to the nature of chronic pain.’

Ms O’Sullivan, who at the time of the accident was aged 27 and from Onslow Gardens, Commons Road, Cork, was a front seat passenger in a Ford Focus being driven to a nephew’s birthday party by her boyfriend, Jason Coughlan. A Peugeot 205, owned and driven by Agnieska Brozda, collided with Ms O’Sullivan’s car at a stop sign.

Judge Barr said Ms Brozda, of Brookdale Estate, Glanmire, had accepted the blame for the accident, and the case came before the court for an assessment of what compensation was due.

‘At the trial, the defendant [Ms Brozda] strongly relied on the proposition that this was a “lowimpact” collision,’ the judge said.

He said her legal team relied on photographs of each of the vehicles after the accident, which did not show any major structural damage to either vehicle, as well as the fact that repairs to the plaintiff’s car cost just €249.70.

But he said Ms O’Sullivan denied it was a very minor impact.

The judge said: ‘She stated that there was a loud bang, her vehicle was shunted forward, her head was propelled forwards and then backwards striking the headrest, and her right knee struck the dashboard, causing an injury to her knee.’ Because she had undergone extensive surgery involving the back of her neck and the base of her skull some 11 weeks earlier, Ms O’Sullivan said the trauma to the soft tissues of her neck and shoulders was considerably worse than if she had been healthy at the time of the accident. The judge said Ms Sullivan claimed she had suffered a severe soft-tissue injury to her neck, to her shoulders and to her lower back, as well as pain in her knee.

In addition, while she had been suffering from headaches for some time prior to the accident, she said these were considerably exacerbated by the accident, and continued to the present day.

Ms O’Sullivan had visited a pain specialist eight times, in addition to having extensive physiotherapy and acupuncture, the judge said.

She had also experienced depression and PTSD, the court heard.

Despite all the treatment, the judge said Ms O’Sullivan had been unable to return to her post in human resources at KBC Bank. It was envisaged she’d only be able to go back on a phased basis.

The defendant’s medical witnesses accepted Ms O’Sullivan suffered pain, but said the accident should only have caused her soft-tissue problems for a number of months at most. They said Ms O’Sullivan was ‘somewhat hysterical in nature, or is prone to catastrophising the extent of her injury and disablement’.

They said she would be better served by returning to ordinary activities, including work.

But Judge Barr concluded: ‘This young woman has had her life totally disrupted for the last three years. Her injuries have affected her in every aspect of her life. She has been rendered very considerably disabled during this period. She has undergone very extensive treatment.’

He awarded her €96,000 in general damages to date, and €50,000 for damages for the future. In addition, he gave her €17,649 for medical and other expenses, €105,500 in lost earnings to date, and €33,000 for lost earnings as she returns to work on a phased basis.

‘Very extensive treatment’