Dublin Bus ordered to pay out €143,000 for passenger’s crushed foot

Maybe all the money squirreled away from unclaimed change receipts on the buses could be used by Dublin Bus to pay out all these compensation claims. It’s not clear what route this happened on, maybe the 70N?

The Irish Times [subs required] reports:

A man has secured €143,000 damages from the High Court after he had to have five toes amputated when a bus drove over his foot.

The action by Sean Horan (58), unemployed, McClean’s Court, The Coombe, Dublin, was against Dublin Bus arising out of the incident at Usher’s Quay, Dublin, on December 18th, 2003 as he was attempting to board a double decker bus.

Dublin Bus had denied negligence and also pleaded that Mr Horan had failed to remain in the designated bus queue.

Today, Mr Justice John Quirke ruled Dublin Bus was 65 per cent liable for the incident and Mr Horan was 35 per cent liable In light of those findings, he reduced the damages from €220,000 to €143,000.

Mr Horan had denied he was drunk at the time of the incident and said he had drank three cans of beer that day. He told the court he was with a number of people in the queue when he saw the door of the bus open and close.

He claimed that, when the bus moved off, he had attempted to wave it down with his hand and, when the bus driver did not see him, he had stepped out onto the roadway where the accident occurred.

Mr Justice Quirke said he was satisfied that the consumption of alcohol was not a primary cause of the accident and that the bus driver was in breach of duty to the plaintiff in failing to keep a proper look out.

The court was told Mr Horan is likely to be left with a limp and permanent stiffness of the shoulder.

2 Responses to “Dublin Bus ordered to pay out €143,000 for passenger’s crushed foot”

  1. Good to see that yet again the Judge reduces the amount of compensation by a considerable amount.
    In this case approx 30%.
    This is the second case in recent weeks where a claimant has had the award reduced by a similar amount.

    Whilst one cannot argue with the verdict arrived at in open court I would have some issues with the Judge`s seemingly dismissive labeling of the Busdriver as being in breach of duty to the plaintiff.

    This case and others recently only serves to focus attention on the complete lack of focus on Bus Stop safety and location.
    This topic was,we were assured post Wellington Quay,of the highest importance and was to be fully safety audited by experts.
    The reality is somewhat less comprehensive with little or no evidence of a safety imperative even in recent Bus Stop provision.
    At the end of the day it appears it`s simpler for the Authorities to blame the Busdriver ?

  2. Great. So the bus driver has to be liable for people in the road that are out of the range of his vision? There’s a great way to get around that; don’t move the bus. So now this unemployed oul’fella gets a nice settlement and probably gets more compensation out of the government due to being disabled on top of getting the dole. Send the bill to Karl Marx’s estate.

Leave a Reply