Some solicitors who make medical negligence claims for clients initially seek up to three times the figure they are eventually prepared to settle for, according to the head of the State agency that manages clinical claims.
He also said a minority of lawyers remained “implacably opposed” to mediation, which offered a less adversarial and less traumatic alternative to going to court.
Ciarán Breen, director of the State Claims Agency, acknowledged concerns about the parents of children who have been catastrophically injured as a result of medical negligence having to undergo the trauma of giving evidence in court. He said this mostly happened in cases where the demands made by lawyers were significantly overstated.
Direct experience
“The agency has direct experience of cases where solicitors acting on behalf of plaintiffs have originally demanded a multiple of two or even three times the figure that they were eventually prepared to settle for,” he wrote in the agency’s latest newsletter.
Mr Breen referred to one “striking example” where lawyers initially sought €13 million in compensation. They refused to settle for a lesser figure before the case went to court but then settled the case for €5 million following a number of days in court.
“Had the agency settled at the figure originally proposed, it simply would not have been doing its job on behalf of the taxpayer,” he wrote.
High Court judge Mary Irvine criticised the State last December for its approach to medical negligence cases, saying she had dealt with two cases in a week where the State had delayed in admitting liability, causing additional stress for the children and families involved.
Ms Justice Irvine subsequently withdrew the criticism in one case and accepted there was no deliberate policy by the claims agency to withhold admissions of liability.
Responding to the criticism prompted by the judge’s comments, Mr Breen said many cases it handled were very complex, with liability and causation difficult to determine. He said the agency had to ensure no one was undercompensated but by law it was also required to make sure no one was overcompensated.
Mr Breen said the claims agency settled 19 cases by way of mediation in 2013. It had offered mediation in many other cases but “a minority” of lawyers remained “implacably opposed”. “It is difficult to understand why. The agency genuinely feels that mediation would be in the best interests of their clients, yet these lawyers disagree,” he said.
