Damages for psychiatric injury reduced by €30,000 on appeal

Appeal of assessment of damages - personal injuries action - where judicial council personal injuries guidelines applies - plaintiff previously awarded €90,000 in damages - defendants argue amount excessive and by misapplication of guidelines - plaintiff suffered injuries as a result of an exploding gas oven at her workplace - developed psychiatric injuries - suffered burns to body - remained with residual scars - medical reports agreed by parties - court summarises reports - High Court trial judge found PTSD was the plaintiff’s most significant injury - trial judge placed PTSD in the serious category and awarded €45,000 - further 20,000 for drink and depression- awarded €25,000 for burns - defendants argue firstly that trial judge wrong to classify PTSD as “serious” - second was wrong to award 2 separate damages for PTSD - consideration by CoA of part 4 of guidelines relating to psychiatric damage - further provisions in introduction to guideline - consideration English authorities - consideration of comparable cases - court finds a number of errors in approach of trial judge - court finds that the trial judge fell into error in treating the plaintiff’s PTSD as falling into the serious category - firstly because both parties accepted that it fell within moderate category - secondly court would have to be satisfied injuries are still likely to cause significant disability for foreseeable future - evidence was opposite as plaintiff no longer satisfied criteria for PTSD - further court finds cumulative award for psychiatric injury fell foul of doctrine of proportionality - court ultimately substitutes an award of €60,000 in damages.