asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health whether his attention was directed to the published report of the High Court decision in the case of Daniel Walsh v. South Cork Board of Public Assistance; whether he is aware that the claim of Mr. Walsh for damages for the loss of an eye, through the alleged negligence of the board and its servants, was dismissed on the grounds that, as the plaintiff was a non-paying patient, he could not recover damages from the board; and whether, since, as it now appears, a poor person unable to pay for hospital services has no redress even when negligence is proved against the hospital authorities, he will introduce proposals for amending the law so as to remove this disability.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Claims Against Hospital Authorities.
The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the third part of the question, I understand that an appeal to the Supreme Court is possible in this case, and in the circumstances it will be appreciated that I should not make a statement in the matter at this stage.
May I ask the Minister is he aware that my question has nothing whatever to do with the merits of that case, but raises a general principle of urgent and vital public interest in my opinion?
The terms of the question refer specifically to the claim of Mr. Walsh and, as I said, the matter is sub judice, as a point of law is being brought to the Supreme Court, and I do not propose to make any statement now.