About this case:

• Judgment:
  External link

The woman was described to have had an active lifestyle before the accident, which left her with chronic pain to the extent that she could only work part time and had to forgo her ambitions to join the PSNI.

Finding the woman to be an honest witness who did not seek to dramatise the effects of her injuries, Mr Justice Colton found CCTV evidence adduced by the defendant to be unhelpful in his assessment.

Background

The plaintiff in this action, Ms Megan Louise Thompson, was involved in a road traffic accident at approximately 7:30am whilst she was cycling to work in the East Bridge Street/Albert Bridge Road area of Belfast. She was struck by a motor vehicle driven by the defendant, Ms Hannah McKimm.

An apportionment of liability was agreed between the parties whereby the defendant was held 80 per cent responsible and the plaintiff 20 per cent responsible for the accident.

Ms Thompson sought general damages for personal injuries, pain, suffering and loss of amenity. She further claimed damages for future loss of earnings.

Justice Colton outlined the plaintiff’s background, including her passion for travelling, her interest in the coffee industry, and her intention to join the police service upon attaining a 2:1 honours in criminology and sociology from Northumbria University in 2009. Prior to the accident, she was very active and enjoyed physically demanding outdoor sports, which were a particular feature of her travel experiences.

In the course of his judgment, Justice Colton was satisfied that she would have settled on a career in the PSNI circa 2018, after she had completed her travel plans, which included a working holiday in France selling coffee at festivals.

None of these travel plans came to pass because of the injuries she sustained on 1 July 2013.

Injuries sustained

As a result of the collision the plaintiff was thrown from her bicycle before striking the windscreen of the defendant’s motor car and falling onto the ground. She had immediate back pain and was taken on a spinal board to the Royal Victoria Hospital Accident and Emergency Department.

Justice Colton said that there was a large measure of agreement between the medical experts as to the injuries sustained by the plaintiff. Medical evidence was that all of her symptoms were expected to remain “chronically and permanently”.

The effects of the accident described by the plaintiff suggest that the injuries she sustained had a life changing impact on her; that prior to the accident she was “living the dream”, but that she had to “let go of the life” she had created, and was instead “stuck with this new one”.

The plaintiff continued “this is not what I wanted to be … I wanted a career … to be active”.

Struggling psychologically with her condition, her injuries affected her self-image and her self-confidence. In practical terms she described how she was unable to get back to work until about 6 months after the accident. In “an attempt to reclaim her life” she returned to Javaman where the court heard she had been working since the age of 14. She initially did 2 hour shifts but ultimately this did not work out and her employment was terminated. She simply was unable to cope with the back pain arising from her work activity.

Notwithstanding that set back she did obtain employment, and was now working roughly 15 hours per week.

She says this is the maximum she can manage. Whilst she does her best to protect herself she finds that depending on the degree of activity she suffers from back pain. After working 3 or 4 days she will go straight to bed and set herself for the next day. She did try to increase her shifts to four in a row but simply could not manage.

Assessment of the plaintiff

Justice Colton formed the view that she was a reliable, honest and credible witness. She gave her evidence with dignity. In my view she did her best to give a history of how she had been affected by this incident covering a period of almost 4 years. She did not seek to over dramatize her symptoms in my opinion, nor did she seek to embellish her evidence. I formed a very favourable impression of her. I have come to the conclusion that the symptoms she has suffered arising from her accident have had a significant life changing impact on her.

Furthermore, Justice Colton did not find DVD/surveillance evidence of any great import – it was no surprise that the plaintiff was seen walking without restriction, as this was exactly what was found when she was examined by the orthopaedic surgeons.

Assessment of Damages

A total figure for general damages was calculated at £90,000, to include:

Justice Colton determined that the projected future earnings for the plaintiff but for the accident was £523,833, minus the figure for residual earnings calculated at £350,555. Loss of pension was calculated at £40,213, minus the figure for residual pension calculated at £21,053.

As such, the total financial loss was calculated at £192,439.

Taking into consideration the reduction of 20 per cent for contributory liability on the plaintiff’s part, and adding interest of 6 per cent to general damages, the total judgment was agreed at £230,271.