Dublin City Council is being sued in a multi-million euro claim by a man who says he suffered life-changing injuries when he fell off his electric bike as he travelled along a Dublin city centre cycle lane.
The action is believed to be one of the first personal injuries claims before the High Court in relation to injuries allegedly caused in an electric bike accident.
The High Court was this week told the claim is “very substantial” and special damages, including future care costs and loss of earnings, run to millions of euros.
All the claims are denied and full defences have been filed in the action.
Christmas digestifs: buckle up for the strong stuff once dinner is done
Western indifference to Israel’s thirst for war defines a grotesque year of hypocrisy
Why do so many news sites look so boringly similar? Because they have to play by Google and Meta’s rules
Christmas dinner for under €35? We went shopping to see what the grocery shop really costs
A judge has already ruled that the man, who suffered a catastrophic brain injury, cannot be identified.
The man was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident in a city centre cycle lane three years ago. He claims his head struck a series of granite separators or bollards and he sustained catastrophic injuries.
He has sued Dublin City Council and the cycle lane designer, AECOM Ireland Ltd, with registered offices at Lower Hatch Street, Dublin.
AECOM has joined construction company Clonmel Enterprises Ltd, of Naas, Co Kildare, which carried out work on the cycle lane as a third party to the proceedings.
The case is listed to proceed in May at the High Court.
It is claimed the man sustained personal injuries, loss and damage due to the defendants’ negligence and breach of duty in the maintenance, design, upkeep and condition of the cycle track.
The man was cycling on his electric bicycle when he was allegedly caused to fall due to the design and layout of the cycle track and a pedestrian plaza at the location.
It is further claimed there was a failure to give any sufficient consideration to the difficulties that were allegedly likely to arise from the intermingling of pedestrians and cyclists at the location.
An uneven raised kerb of between 60 to 70mm in height was allegedly permitted to be present at the location when, it is claimed, the defendants knew or ought to have known that a kerb of that height presents a hazard and a danger to cyclists using the cycle track.
It is also contended there was a failure to provide a soft kerb of up to 50mm, which would have enabled cyclists to traverse it, or a standard kerb of between 100 to 150mm, which would have alerted cyclists to the potential danger of seeking to traverse the kerb.
It is further claimed there was a failure to take any or any adequate measures to prevent or discourage cyclists from veering off the cycle track and into the alleged hidden danger that the kerb presented.
There was also, it is claimed an alleged failure to take any or any adequate cognisance of alleged previous accidents involving cyclists in the area.
As a result of his injuries, it is claimed the man is unable to live independently, work or engage in his previous family and social activities.
All the claims are denied.
In the High Court this week, Mr Justice Michael Hanna gave discovery of documents to the third party, Clonmel Enterprises Ltd, against AECOM Ireland Ltd including for a period in 2020 after the accident.
Counsel for Clonmel Enterprises, Elaine Morgan SC, told the court it was their case that Clonmel did exactly as required by AECOM. It was their case, she said, that they were contracted by the council but supervised in the works by AECOM.
Counsel for AECOM, Joe Jeffers SC, said the company already made extensive discovery of up to 8,000 documents in the case. He said the case was in relation to the height of the kerb and it was their case they had provided a detailed design on the matter.