Ireland: Landmark Ruling For Personal Injury Claims

Why should I read this?

The Supreme Court’s decision in Delaney v PIAB & Ors is a landmark ruling with significant implications for personal injury claims in Ireland. A majority of the Court considered that the Personal Injuries Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) adopted by the Judicial Council three years prior, on 6 March 2021, have normative/legal effect. These Guidelines, which are now confirmed as legally binding, have led to a significant reduction in awards of damages for personal injuries. The decision reinforces the authority of the Guidelines and indicates that any future changes to them would require legislative action by the Oireachtas.

Five judgments were delivered by the seven-Judge panel which demonstrates the complexity of the issues arising in the case as to separation of powers, democratic accountability, delegated legislation, the independence of the judiciary, statutory construction, constitutional construction, the limits of judicial competence, retrospectivity, vested rights, equality, affirmation of secondary legislation by subsequent legislative enactment, and the nature of what a guideline is.

The Supreme Court's ruling also addressed constitutional issues, with a majority of the Court declaring section 7(2)(g) of the Judicial Council Act 2019 unconstitutional due to its encroachment on judicial independence, as guaranteed by Article 35.2 of the Constitution. Despite this, the Guidelines themselves were ratified independently by the Oireachtas and given legal effect, by the enactment of the Family Leave Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2021 (“2021 Act”), thus in force as a matter of law.

What impact could this decision have on personal injury claims/generally?

The Guidelines, which came into effect on 24 April 2021, introduced a new framework for assessing the award of general damages for pain and suffering in personal injury claims in Ireland. The Injuries Resolution Board (formerly the Personal Injuries Assessment Board or “PIAB”) is required to have regard to the Guidelines in all assessments made by it after the commencement of the 2021 Act, replacing the previous Book of Quantum. This case originated when the Appellant, Ms Delaney, contested the assessment of her ankle injury. On 12 April 2019, the Appellant tripped while walking on a public footpath. An application was made for assessment to PIAB, as required, on 4 June 2019. At the time the application was made to PIAB, the basis for assessing damages was by reference to the same principles governing the measure of damages in tort as would be applied by a court, and on the basis that regard was to be had to the Book of Quantum. The injury was assessed by PIAB on 14 May 2021 at €3,000 under the Guidelines, but Ms Delaney argued that, based on the Book of Quantum, the injury's value could have been as high as €34,000. The Court found that PIAB had acted properly and in accordance with law in having regard to the Guidelines when assessing Ms Delaney’s claim. A majority of the Court found that there were no vested property or personal rights in the Appellant to have her case assessed by PIAB or by a Court, under any earlier guidelines.

Mr. Justice Peter Charleton emphasised the gravity of the case, noting its potential impact on a multitude of personal injury claims awaiting resolution. The decision underscores the systemic importance of the Guidelines and establishes that any future modifications to these Guidelines will necessitate legislative action. The ruling confirms that departure from the Guidelines should be rare and justifiable, reserved for cases where the court or PIAB considers the award within the range indicated by the Guidelines would not represent just and/or proportionate compensation for the injury sustained in that particular case, based on clear and well-articulated reasons.

The Court’s decision to uphold the Guidelines signifies a move towards a more consistent, certain, and predictable system for personal injury compensation. This decision is likely to have a lasting impact on how personal injury claims are assessed and general damages for pain and suffering awarded in this jurisdiction, promoting greater consistency and fairness in the legal system. In particular, the decision has provided a more predictable legal landscape for the insurance industry and may serve to progress the insurance reform agenda.

The judgments are also significant from a public law perspective as they have developed and evolved the law on important issues such as retrospectivity, statutory interpretation, secondary legislation, and the separation of powers. The judgments will therefore be of significant general importance and will be of interest to bodies operating in the public sector, as well as regulators, regulated entities and others operating in regulated sectors.

What other issues arose in the case?

A split decision from the Court also highlighted a constitutional concern regarding the Judicial Council Act 2019, specifically section 7(2)(g), which requires the Judicial Council to adopt these guidelines. The majority of the Court found this provision unconstitutional as it stands, finding that in its present form it infringes upon the judiciary's independence by creating what amounts to "hard" law.

Mr. Justice Gerard Hogan, while expressing support for the concept of guidelines for their role in fostering legal certainty and efficiency, was of the view that the judiciary should not have the power to establish guidelines that effectively alter substantive law. Nevertheless, a majority of the Judges, including Mr. Justice Hogan, agreed that the Guidelines had been independently validated and legally enacted by the Oireachtas through the Family Leave and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2021, which came into effect on 24 April 2021. This ratification by the legislature serves to give the Guidelines their binding legal status, resolving the constitutional issue raised. The decision marks a pivotal moment in the legal landscape, setting a precedent for how personal injury claims will be assessed and compensated in the future.

We will provide more detailed legal briefings in due course on specific issues arising in the case.

With thanks to Melanie Ardiff, Professional Support Lawyer, for contributing to this briefing.

[1] Bridget Delaney v The Personal Injuries Assessment Board, The Judicial Council, Ireland and The Attorney General [2024] IESC 10