Man sues over brain injury suffered in car crash that killed three people

A man who suffered a brain injury in a car crash in which three other people, including a pregnant woman, died has sued for damages.

Michael Tevlin, the High Court was told, has no memory of the incident in which the car in which he was travelling as a back-seat passenger veered across a road as the driver, with whom Mr Tevlin was drinking earlier, attempted to overtake on the Carrickmacross bypass on December 27th, 2010.

The driver Kevin McArdle, who was later jailed after being convicted of dangerous driving causing death, ploughed into a car driven by Stephen Connolly.

Pregnant wife

Mr Connolly’s pregnant wife, Róisín (39), and two 27-year old men, who were passengers in McArdle’s car, all died in the crash.

Mr Tevlin, Lisankisky, Kingscourt, Co Cavan, has sued McArdle, Longfield, Carrickmacross, Co Monaghan, and the Motor Insurance Bureau of Ireland (MIBI) over his injuries.

Judgment was yesterday granted against McArdle, who remains in jail, in default of appearance.

Mr Justice Kevin Cross was told by counsel for Mr Tevlin that his client admitted he had had far too much to drink on the day of the crash.

While he had no memory of the crash, Mr Tevlin said he and the driver had a lot to drink.

Patrick Kean SC said his client did not know McArdle’s car was not insured and Mr Tevlin said there was an insurance disc on the vehicle.

The MIBI denies any liability on grounds alleging Mr Tevlin travelled voluntarily in a car with an uninsured driver and when he knew McArdle should not have driven a vehicle following consumption of alcohol.

“Drinking spree”

Edward Walsh SC, for the MIBI, said Mr Tevlin and McArdle had gone on a “drinking spree” and McArdle had consumed nine pints and nine shorts over about nine hours on December 27th, 2010.

Six licensed premises had been visited by Mr Tevlin, McArdle and the two men who died in the incident, he said.

Mr Walsh argued there was gross contributory negligence on behalf of Mr Tevlin and a level of disregard for his own safety and that of members of the public.

That conduct was such that no liability should be imposed on the MIBI.

The case continues.