A MAN who was assaulted at a wake in a pub should not receive any damages for injuries suffered because he gave false and exaggerated evidence, a High Court judge has ruled.
While assessing the injuries suffered by Terence Gammell at €40,000, less half due to Mr Gammell’s own provocative behaviour, Mr Justice Michael Hanna said he was dismissing Mr Gammell’s claim entirely because of his “fanciful and self-serving” evidence.
The judge said he was entitled to reject the claim under the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 which allows a court to dismiss false or misleading claims.
The judge also found the pub had no liability as there was nothing it could have done to prevent the assault.
He noted Mr Gammell’s claim against the pub had been settled previously.
Mr Gammell, a labourer from Cederwood Crescent, Kilcoole, Wicklow, had sued David White, The Crescent, Greystones, Wicklow, and Lees pub, Kilcoole, arising out of the incident in the pub on St Stephen’s night, 2005.
Mr White, his wife and a number of other people were in the pub during a wake over the death just before Christmas of a young local man from sudden adult death syndrome.
Mr Gammell, known locally as “Maggot”, was barred from Lees and other bars, but arrived at Lees claiming he wanted to see one of his daughters who was working there that night.
During the hearing, Mr Gammell told Mr White’s counsel, Mel Christle SC, he did not know why his daughter had not been called to give evidence on his behalf.
The court heard it was a tradition among local pubs, when someone died, to admit even barred persons to offer condolences to the deceased’s family.
Mr White bought Mr Gammell a pint in an attempt to be friendly given the tragic circumstances, the court was told.
It was claimed that Mr Gammell, who had been drinking earlier that day, started making offensive sexual remarks to Mr White and his wife which they tried to “laugh off”.
When Mr Gammell started describing the family of the deceased as “knackers” and alcoholics, Mr White demanded he leave, the court was told.
When he refused, he was struck in the face by Mr White. Mr Gammell denied he made any remarks and also denied that he became aggressive or faced up to Mr White before the assault in the pub.
Mr White admitted striking Mr Gammell, causing an injury to his cheekbone, and later pleaded guilty to assault at Wicklow Circuit Court which imposed a 2½-year suspended jail sentence.
Yesterday, Mr Justice Hanna said he had to find Mr Gammell was injured as a result of an assault.
He assessed damages at €15,000 for suffering to date and €25,000 into the future but said, because of Mr Gammell’s behaviour on the night, that award should be reduced by 50 per cent.
The judge added, as he did not accept the version of events given by Mr Gammell and preferred the evidence of Mr and Mrs White, he was ruling Mr Gammell had given false and exaggerated evidence under the 2004 law amounting to an abuse of the court process.
The judge ruled Mr Gammell’s claim came within the terms of the Act and, in those circumstances, he dismissed the entire case against Mr White and awarded costs against Mr Gammell.