Bloomsday Cyclists hit the street of Dublin.
As part of Bikeweek 2010 this Friday the 18th of June, the Irish Youth Foundation, in association with Cyclone Couriers, will be hosting the annual charity Bloomsday Messenger Bike Rally and Lunch, which celebrates James Joyce’s Ulysses and Dublin.
On Friday, over 70 messenger bikers will gather at the Wolfe Tone statue on St Stephen’s Green before making their way to the Mansion House, where they will be joined in a rousing rendition of Molly Malone by the Lord Mayor of Dublin.
The cyclists, who will be dressed in their finest Edwardian attire, will then embark on a journey through the streets of Dublin, making three pit-stops along the way for well-deserved refreshments.
Over 200 colourful guests are then expected to welcome the rally at the historic Shelbourne Hotel, where a fun-filled lunch and a charity auction will follow.
Senator David Norris will round off the celebrations by reading an extract from James Joyce’s Ulysses.
Proceeds of the charity event go to the IYF.
The Bloomsday Messenger Bike Rally and Lunch has, over the past 17 years, raised more than €600,000 for community and voluntary groups throughout the country, who work to create positive differences in the lives of children and young people facing adversity.
When: Friday, 18th June 2010
Time: 9:00am
Location: Wolfe Tone Statue, St Stephen’s Green
We recommend you keep an eve out for cyclists around the city and cheer them on
www.Bikelaw.ie
€76k awarded to bus driver after suspension failure causes serious injury
A DUBLIN Bus driver injured when the pneumatic suspension on his vehicle failed as he drove over a speed ramp has been awarded nearly €76,000 in High Court damages.
The driver was represented by Dublin personal injury law firm Paul W Tracey Solicitors
The firm had sued the employer and a local authority on behalf of the injured driver (Dublin Bus & South Dublin Co Co) over the incident on the Tallaght to Bohernabreena Road on September 27, 2005, when the driver suffered injuries to his neck and lower back.
The driver had driven the 201 bus over three ramps on the road when, as he went over a fourth ramp, the suspension malfunctioned and caused a loss of “cushion effect” to the bus.
Mr. Justice Éamon de Valera sitting in the High Court awarded €75,911 damages against Dublin Bus. The judge said that the driver was entitled to succeed in his claim against the bus company but not against the council which had, he said, built the ramps in accordance with best practice.
The judgment went on to say that Dublin Bus had a statutory duty to ensure necessary measures are taken so that the equipment used is suitable, or properly adapted, for its purpose so that it can be used by employees without risk to their safety and health.
Where there is a risk or rupture or disintegration of equipment likely to pose a danger to health and safety, then appropriate protection measures shall be taken, the judge added.
Paul W Tracey Solicitors June 2010
Injuries Board Authorisations- what do I do next?
Filed under: Accidents, Drink Driving, Injury Law, Road Accidents
In recent months we at Paul W Tracey Solicitors have found that we are receiving an increasing amount of queries from clients who have received authorisations from the injuries board for matters relating to accidents at work, road traffic accidents and other personal injury cases and are unsure as to what the next step in the process is.
What does the Authorisation mean?
If you have processed an injuries board application, the injuries board may issue an authorisation in 3 sets of circumstances;
1) The Respondent has declined to have the claim assessed; in these circumstances the respondent named on the injuries board authorisation has declined to permit to allow the injuries board assess your case.
2) The injuries board have reviewed your application and have deemed that due to the nature of your injuries the injuries board will not be able to assess your case within the time frame permitted under law.
3) An assessment may have been made by the injuries board but either you or the Respondent has declined the assessment, this could arise in circumstances where you are of the view that the amount of the assessment is in inadequate or the respondent is of the view that the amount of the assessment is excessive.
What Should I do?
Instructing a solicitor with expertise in this area like ourselves is the first step to secure your position
We can offer advice to you in regard to issuing Court Proceedings.
We always liaise with Senior and junior counsel when assessing such matters and we have over 20 successful years in specialising in personal injury litigation much to our very satisfied client base.
Please be aware that certain time frames exist under Irish law in order to permit you to commence court proceedings, it is therefore important that you contact our office in order to get initial advice in regard to these timeframes in order to avoid your case becoming statute barred under law.
What is the Cost?
Our initial advises are on a no obligation basis.
Contact us at law@traceysolicitors.ie or by phoning 00 1 8475656
Uninsured drivers in Ireland on the rise?
THE NUMBER of uninsured drivers causing road accidents has increased by approximately 10 per cent in 2009 according to the chief executive of the Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Ireland. (MIBI)
One suspects that this significant rise in the number of claims against uninsured drivers being processed by the MIBI is due to the economic downturn.
“It appears that the recession may have had an impact on the number of uninsured drivers on the road. It is a very worrying trend and an extremely serious issue. Driving uninsured is a criminal offence’’ commented a spokesperson for the MIBI
The MIBI is responsible for compensating victims of accidents caused by uninsured and unidentified vehicles. It also compensates victims or untraced motorists who cause accidents or who leave the scene of accidents.
Recent figures show that in 2008 the MIBI settled over 2,000 claims with uninsured drivers who were involved in accidents, most of which involved bodily injury.
Mr. Casey the chief executive of the Bureau estimated that the figure for 2009 will be approximately 10 per cent higher than in 2008.
Although the cost of motor insurance has been declining in recent years this problem has not gone away! “In real terms the cost of motor insurance is the same as 10 years ago. Premiums have been coming down and there is a lot more competition in the market place. Price is simply is not an excuse.”
He also rejected the claim that a lack of concern among drivers about Garda surveillance has led to an increase in the number of motorists driving without insurance. “There has been an increase in the traffic corps in recent years, and there are more and more roadside checks,” he said.
If you have had an accident caused by an uninsured driver or where a driver has left the scene or failed to stop at the scene it is important that you act promptly and comply with the requirements of the MIBI.
We at Paul Tracey Solicitors have extensive experience in this are of injury work and will be happy to assist you with any questions you have on this topic.
Tips if involved in an accident
-Call the Garda at the scene
-Take the names & addresses of any witnesses
-Seek medical assistance promptly if required
-Take prompt legal advice to ensure your rights are protected
Paul Tracey Solicitor 08/03/2010
(Paul Tracey is a lawyer based in Dublin specializing in personal injury litigation in particular road traffic cases where insurance issues arise.)
Warning issued to prevent accidents in Freezing Weather conditions
The Health & Safety Authority has issued recommendations to employers & workers in light of the recent cold snap.
The advise is timely and is of benefit to employers and employees alike in reducing accidents in the workplace.
‘Freezing temperatures renders construction work even more hazardous than normal. When the body is unable to warm itself, cold related stress may result. Four factors contribute to cold stress: cold air temperatures, high velocity air movement, dampness of the air and contact with cold water or surfaces. A cold environment forces the body to work harder to maintain its temperature. Cold air, water, and snow all draw heat from the body. Wind chill is the combination of air temperature and wind speed.
Risk Assessments need to be reviewed as extreme low temperatures greatly change and usually increase the risks associated with most external construction work. The following areas of work are particularly adversely affected by extreme cold conditions:
- Work at Height – work at height platforms, roofwork, etc. will all become more hazardous if ice or snow are on them. The risks of falls from heights are increased as the risk of slips, etc. is greatly increased. This type of work should only be undertaken if absolutely necessary and sufficient additional controls are put in place. For example – full check of all platforms and fall/edge protection, de-icing of work platforms, etc.
- Slips, Trips & Falls –the risk of these are greatly increased due to icy conditions. Walkways should be cleared of ice and snow with regular gritting/ salting. Ensure hoses, etc. aren’t left running in areas as the excess water will freeze and cause a further slip hazard.
- Construction plant operation –
- caution must be exercised when accessing or egressing from construction plant as access steps and hand hold surfaces may be covered in ice.
- wheel grip could be compromised and control of vehicles could be lost
- Welfare Facilities – arrangements must be in place to provide adequate welfare facilities, especially an area where workers can go to warm up, change/dry clothes and get hot beverages.
The following should be noted when risk assessing and planning for construction work in extreme cold temperatures.
Cold Temperature Exposures, Injuries, and Controls on the Jobsite
1. Wearing the proper clothes / PPE may be the most significant precaution to reducing cold stress. Wearing appropriate clothes for cold weather usually involves using three or more layers of clothing. Also use layering to protect the head, hands and feet.
2. Drink plenty of fluids, preferably warm, sweet beverages. Thirst is suppressed in a cold environment and dehydration may occur when fluid intake is reduced.
3. Increase caloric intake when working in cold environments. Workers in cold environments who wear heavy, protective clothing expend more heat and so require 10-15 percent more calories.
4. If required, a work warm-up schedule should be used to provide periodic times for warm-up breaks. Additional breaks should be provided as the wind velocity increases and/or the temperature drops.
5. Avoid the cold if you are becoming exhausted or immobilised. These conditions can accelerate the effects of cold weather.
6. Engineering controls can be effective such as using heaters in areas, where practical, shielding work areas from winds and drafts, using insulating material on equipment handles, especially metal handles, etc.
7. Select the warmest hours of the day, where possible, when braving the cold. Minimise activities that reduce circulation.
8. Educate employees on symptoms of cold-related stresses: heavy shivering, uncomfortable coldness, severe fatigue, drowsiness and/or euphoria.
9. Use the buddy system.Work in pairs when working in extreme weather conditions so partners can monitor one another and obtain help quickly in an emergency.’
It is clear that extra vigilance is required when the weather such as recently experienced comes to bother us!
Paul Tracey
20/01/2010
Personal Injuries
Injuries Board report shows average public liability award to injured persons was €22,865
The Injuries Board has reported that during the two year period from January 2007 to December 2008 it made 2,859 awards in public liability claims cases. The Board awarded compensation totalling €65,400,000. The average award was €22,885. This compares with an average award of €20,792 to PL claimants in 2007.
In a report issued recently- A Review of Public Liability Awards 2007 & 2008 – the Injuries Board gave details of:
- awards
- location of accidents
- causes of accidents
- type of injury suffered.
The average award was €22,865.
Most awards were for less than €38,000, the upper limit of awards the Circuit Court can make.
While only 0.5% of awards were for over €100,000, that in fact means that 14 awards of €100,000 or more were made by the Board.
Over 350 awards (12.5%) of between €38,000 and €100,000 were made.
Thirty-two percent of awards (914) of between €20,000 and €38,000 were made. Fifty-five percent (1,572) of all awards were for less that €20,000.
Over a quarter of all awards (27%) were made against local authorities in relation to accidents in public places under the control of local authorities.
Nearly a quarter of all awards (24%) were made in respect of accidents in retail and shopping outlets. The other locations of accidents were:
- hotels, pubs, clubs, restaurants (19%)
- leisure facilities (13%)
- transport/utilities (6%)
- education and health establishments (4%)
The remaining 6% of accidents occurred in a variety of locations, including construction sites and car parks.
A remarkable 67% of the accidents were caused by slips, trips and falls.
The other causes of accidents were flying/falling objects (11%),
-injury caused by machinery (5%), cuts (3%),
-burns/scalds, assaults and animals (each 2%),
-one percent each for poisoning and reaction.
-the remaining 6% were attributed to other causes.
The review shows that many accident victims sustain at least two types of injury. The most common injuries suffered are sprains (40%), bruising (32%), fractures (29%), lacerations/cuts (25%) and injuries classified as superficial (10%).
Four percent of awards were for psychological disorders, with crush, intracranial, dislocation and burns each accounting for 2% of injuries.
Seven percent of injuries are classified in the other category.
Given that many of those injured suffer from one or more of the types of injuries listed, the total adds up to 155%.
The review reports that 70% of awards were made to women and while people of all ages suffer accidents, half of all awards went to people aged over 45.
The report provides a valuable insight for workplace owners, drivers and local authorities as to where there focus should be in an effort to prevent such accidents.
Paul Tracey solicitors has specialised in the provision of assistance to injured parties for over 20 years,it’s principal welcomed the publication of the report of the injuries board data which was hitherto unavailable from the court services
Paul Tracey
7th August 2009
Road Accident compensation award reduced against drunk driver!
A significant Road Accident compensation award was reduced against drunk driver today where the injured party was aware of the consumption of alcohol by the driver .
The Supreme Court has ruled a young man who travelled in a car driven by another man whom he knew had several alcoholic drinks is 35 per cent liable for serious injuries suffered in a subsequent accident, not 15 per cent as found by a judge in the original High Court hearing.
On that basis, the three judge court today reduced to a €1.3 million damages award by High Court Judge Ray Moran to €890,000 arising from the accident in Co Tipperary 10 years ago.
The court dismissed arguments by the car driver’s legal team that the High Court should have dismissed Mr Moran’s entire case against the driver after it found as a fact Mr Moran got into a car with a driver whom he knew had been drinking.
The case arose from an accident on the night of April 23rd/24th 1999 when Mr Moran, Ashbrook Heights, Nenagh, Co Tipperary, was travelling as a front seat passenger in a car driven by Mr Fogarty, Sapwell, Ballingarry, Co Tipperary. Both men were drinking earlier in a bar in Nenagh and they and a woman friend all left the bar at closing time and travelled together in the car driven by Mr Fogarty.
On their homeward journey, the car collided with a wall and Mr Moran suffered head and other injuries as a result of which, it was claimed, he was physically unable to continue his apprenticeship as a block layer. It was also claimed he would have difficulty looking after himself into the future arising from his injuries.
Mr Moran later took High Court proceedings against Mr Fogarty and was awarded € 1.3 million damages, reduced to €1.1 million as a result of that court’s finding of 15 per cent contributory negligence by Mr Moran in getting into a car with a driver whom he knew had been drinking.
Mr Fogarty appealed against the award on several grounds, including that Mr Moran was not entitled to damages as the cause of his injuries was the accident and he would not have suffered those had he refused to travel with a driver whom he knew was intoxicated.
In a reserved judgment today, Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan, with whom the Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray and Ms Justice Susan Denham agreed, ruled the greater blameworthiness in the case must lie with the driver..
It was Mr Fogarty’s decision to drive to the bar in Nenagh and to drive home, notwithstanding the consumption of alcohol, the judge said. It was Mr Fogarty who had control of the car and its driving and it was he who represented a danger not just to
Mr Moran but other road users and the public in general. The accident was entitely attributable to Mr Fogarty’s driving.
consumed alcohol. They had also spent from about 8.30pm to at least 1am in the bar together and, in each other’s presence, drank between six and nine alcoholic drinks over that time.
Mr Moran knew, or certainly ought to have known, Mr Fogarty’s ability to drive was impaired by drink and, quite clearly, he ought not to have driven, the judge said.
Given all the circumstances, the judge said the aportionment of 15 per cent fault to Mr Moran represented “a significant disroportion” between the respective blameworthiness of the two. The court would set aside the 15 per cent finding and replace it with one of 35 per cent for Mr Moran and 65 per cent for Mr Fogarty.
The case shows the balancing a court must take into account when dealing with drunk driving cases. Clearly people who are injured at the hands of drunk drivers are entitled to compensation for their injuries. Those however who consent to travel with drivers whom they know to be drunk have to have regard for the risk they are undertaking when they do so.
The case does not set a precedent for all such cases as clearly the circumstances of each case must be taken into account.
Paul Tracey
21/07/2009
