The Gazette 1993

GAZETTE

DECEMBER 1993

V I E W P 0 1 N T

Undermining the right to bring claims

Once again, the right of people to take claims in the courts for personal injuries has been called into question. In the recent past, a report published by the Irish Business & Employers' Confederation (IBEC) has sought, by implication, to put blame on workers for making claims against their employers when they suffer injuries. The Law Society has expressed con- cern about this report and has issued a statement rebutting some of the conclusions drawn from its findings. On top of the IBEC report, the Irish Insurance Federation has published another Coopers & Lybrand study on j | the cost of motor insurance in this I country which raises questions about j the level and cost of claims for [ personal injuries suffered in motor accidents. Coming on the heels of a suggestion made by the Minister of State for Commerce & Technology, Seamus Brennan, TD, that I compensation awards should be capped and in the wake of criticisms from Dublin Corporation and others about the role of lawyers in the bringing of personal injury claims, there appears to be a concerted attack on the right of people to pursue claims and on the role of solicitors in representing them. The Law Society and the Bar Council have spoken out. They have defended the right of people to take claims for j compensation when they suffer I injuries through no fault of their own and to have their claims litigated in courts of law where the compensation lawyers would be bound to take this line; they would be motivated by self j interest. We would retort that it is no j use engaging in those kind of self- interest tactics, suggesting ulterior motives; far better to deal, by reasoned argument, with the very | important issues that are involved in I this debate. levels are determined by judges. Cynics might well suggest that

Access to the courts and the right to pursue claims - especially claims for personal injuries suffered as a result of the negligence of others - are fundamental principles of our legal system. The right to have that compensation determined in open court following argument and to have the determination made by an independent judge is also, we would have though, vital. Yet, surprisingly few people seem to have grasped, as yet, that both of these rights appear to be under threat at present. We do not dispute that litigation is pushing up small companies, should be concerned about the cost of insurance. However, the answer to rising insurance costs is not to start tinkering with the fundamental rights of people to bring claims or to attempt, by statute, to i limit the levels of compensation that should be paid in individual cases. | These are very serious steps to take and, in our view, should only be contemplated for very grave reasons and where substantial public benefit can be shown to follow. The answer is not to attack the rights of people to be compensated but, j rather, to address the issue of why j there are so many accidents that lead ! to personal injury claims. I ! It is no good complaining about the fact that people take actions when they suffer personal injuries. There is an absolute right to do this, and while industry has a legitimate point in seeking ways of reducing the cost burden, if the outcome is that industry incurs heavy costs as a consequence, the answer is not to attack the rights of people to be compensated but, rather, to address the issue of why there are so many accidents that lead to personal injury claims. j The statistics in relation to accidents in i the workplace in Ireland paint a bleak costs and it is understandable that j business interests, and especially

picture - a picture of carelessness and indifference. Recently, a representative from the Health & Safety Authority pointed out that there are about 13,000 accidents in the workplace in Ireland each year plus an additional 5,000 in agriculture. The figure for industry is derived from the number of persons who claim occupational injury benefit from the Department of Social Welfare each year. The statistics show that the average absence from work by an injured worker is about 35 days which results in the loss of 500,000 man-days per annum to Irish industry. Between 8,000 and 9,000 workers have already been permanently disabled. The total cost of accidents is put at £330m of which £120m is accounted for by employer/public liability insurance. An EU survey has pointed out that Irish industry has the lowest perception of the serious risks to the health and safety of workers of any country in the EU. In the two-year period 1991/92, 120 people were fatally injured through accidents in the workplace; the figure for the first eleven months of this year is 62. Against the background of statistics of this kind, is it any wonder that there are a large number of personal injury claims in the courts? The wonder really is that so few people who do suffer injury make claims. According to the IBEC survey, in 1992 only one in ten accidents at work led to a claim. It is facile to speak, as IBFC did recently, of "opportunistic" claims. If a person suffers hand-blistering in the workplace through no fault of his own and pursues a claim that results in an award of £1,200, what is wrong with this? Is it being suggested that that person should accept an injury of this kind as an occupational hazard and simply put up with it? It is unfortunate, in our view, that the IBEC report attempted to point the finger at workers, suggesting that the bringing of claims was threatening the (Continued overleaf)

373