In Sykula v O’Reilly [2025] IEHC 638, the High Court reduced a personal injuries award after finding that the plaintiff exaggerated aspects of her symptoms and failed to properly disclose her prior mental health history. The case provides important guidance on psychiatric injury, causation and the assessment of damages.
The plaintiff was involved in a rear-end motor accident in December 2017. Liability was accepted by the defendant insurer, and the proceedings came before the High Court on an assessment-only basis. The central issue was whether the defendant was liable for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) alleged to have resulted from the accident, and the extent to which the plaintiff’s ongoing physical and psychological symptoms were attributable to it.
Following the accident, the plaintiff attended CareDoc and hospital, where she was diagnosed with soft tissue injuries to her neck, shoulder and right arm. She claimed ongoing pain, anxiety, flashbacks and sleep disturbance, and alleged that she was unable to return to work on a sustained basis. Her employment was terminated in 2021, she later received an invalidity pension, and she had not worked since.
While the plaintiff accepted she had experienced personal difficulties prior to the accident, including bereavement and workplace stress, she maintained that she had no mental health issues at the time of the collision. The defendant disputed causation, arguing that the plaintiff’s psychiatric difficulties were not caused by the accident and relied on the late introduction of the PTSD claim and the plaintiff’s failure to disclose relevant prior mental health history.
The judge was critical of the plaintiff’s lack of disclosure and found that she tended to exaggerate her symptoms. However, based on the medical evidence, the court accepted that she was not suffering from anxiety or depression at the time of the accident. Applying the “eggshell skull” principle and the test for nervous shock set out in Kelly v Hennessy [1995] 3 IR 253, the court was satisfied that some psychiatric injury was foreseeable.
While the court accepted that the plaintiff would not have suffered PTSD symptoms but for the accident, it found that a number of external factors unrelated to the accident contributed to the severity and duration of her condition. As a result, the court held that only 50% of her psychiatric symptoms were attributable to the accident.
Damages for psychiatric injury were assessed on a pre-Guidelines basis at €60,000, reduced to €30,000 to reflect external contributing factors. An additional €35,000 was awarded for physical injuries to the neck, shoulder and back. The plaintiff was awarded €65,000 in general damages, together with agreed special damages and loss of earnings of €25,000.
This decision highlights the importance of full disclosure in personal injuries claims and demonstrates that exaggeration of symptoms or non-disclosure of relevant medical history can significantly reduce an award, even where liability is admitted.
If you have any questions our specialized Personal Injury Claims team is here to help.
You can contact McCormack Solicitors on
Email: info@carolmccormacksolicitors.ie
Phone: 071 9621846
www.carolmccormacksolicitors.ie
*In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement.
Disclaimer:
The contents of these pages are provided as an information guide only. While every effort is made in preparing material for publication no responsibility is accepted by or on behalf of McCormack Solicitors for any errors, omissions or misleading statements on these pages or any site to which these pages connect.