asked the Minister for Justice if, in view of the fact that there was an out-of-court settlement in one case following a traffic accident, he will consider arranging an ex gratia payment by the State to another victim of the same accident whose award of compensation by the High Court was rejected by the Supreme Court (details supplied).
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Accident Victim.
9.
The case referred to in the question was one in which the evidence was such that a majority of the Supreme Court were satisfied that what occurred was an inevitable accident—the result of an unforeseen blackout caused by a medical condition from which the driver suffered—and therefore that no negligence could be attributed to the driver. It appears that the reason the other injured person was subsequently able to secure an out-of-court settlement in the same situation was that, by the time her case came up for decision, the driver had died and his evidence about the circumstances would not be available, at all events in any direct sense, to go before the jury. The result was that the insurance company apparently thought that, from the more limited evidence that could then be heard, a jury might bring in a finding of negligence.
I am not, of course, involved in any way in these matters and I have given the facts, as I understand them to be, so that the terms of the question may be better understood. As far as an ex gratia payment is concerned, the position is that there is no fund at my disposal from which I could consider the making of such a payment and, indeed, if such a State fund did exist I doubt that it would be administered by my Department which is not responsible for road traffic matters.