A soldier with 13 years service in the Army, who was later turned down for a position in the Garda because of hearing loss, has sued the State for ruining his career prospects in the Garda.
The High Court heard yesterday that Gerard Eustace saw six of his technician colleagues in the Army Signal Corps secure jobs in the Garda telecommunications section during the "brain drain" from the Army in the 1990s. However, Mr Eustace, a father of three, lost out on a Garda post because he was deemed unsuitable because of a hearing loss in his left ear.
His legal claim for loss of potential earnings and pension rights running to hundreds of thousands of euro is being regarded as a test case.
Mr Eustace (35), Castle Rheban, Athy, Co Kildare, has sued the Minister for Defence, the Attorney General and the Garda Commissioner arising from his discovery of the hearing loss in 1999, when he applied for the Garda job.
His case against the Minister for Defence alleges noise-induced hearing loss, while that against the Garda Commissioner claims fair procedures were not adhered to in relation to hearing tests carried out when he applied for the Garda post.
Pádraig McCartan SC, for Mr Eustace, said that had he secured the Garda position, Mr Eustace would have been paid more than in his current position in the private sector with Esat. He had also lost out on the prospect of transferring his Army pension entitlement.
In his evidence, Mr Eustace said he joined the Army in 1987 as an apprentice radio technician and later joined the Signal Corps.
As part of his overall training, he had to do drills and weapons training on firing ranges. He was trained in the firing of weaponry, including rifles and submachine guns. He also experienced artillery and mortar fire, as well as "thunder flashes" - explosives thrown into confined space.
He was promoted to corporal in 1995 and was involved in the training of others in weapons fire. In 1997, those soldiers were issued with muffs which "generally worked", he said. When he used a masonry drill as part of his work, he was issued with a muff which deadened the noise.
Mr Eustace has claimed that in July 1999, he became aware that he had suffered damage to his hearing and suffered from tinnitus. He alleges the damage was noise-induced and was sustained after exposure to heavy gunfire and heavy artillery without adequate ear protection. He claims he was not properly or adequately equipped with ear protection.
In March 1999, he was interviewed for the position of telecommunications technician with the Garda. He was offered the job, subject to a medical by the Garda surgeon which included two hearing tests. He was later told he would not be given the job because a certificate of fitness could not be issued because of audiogram reports on his hearing.
Mr McCartan said his client was told by the Garda he would need a specialist hearing test, but when he applied for it there was a three-month waiting list. At the end of June 1999, he was told he would have to withdraw his application for the Garda job.
Mr Eustace satisfied all other criteria, Mr McCartan said, and the sole reason he was turned down was because of his hearing deficiency. On his discharge from the Army he secured a job with Esat as an electrical engineer, but the Garda Síochána had been his decided career.
The hearing continues today before Mr Justice Vivian Lavan.