High Court grants an order for discovery of various categories of documentation in a personal injuries matter arising from a mountaineering accident, but also restricts discovery where the categories were irrelevant, unnecessary or too vague.
Discovery - personal injuries - plaintiff fell 574 feet during a team building mountaineering exercise he alleges he was given no ability to opt out of and no instruction in – now tetraplegic and with a reduced life expectancy – discovery sought against both Defendants – second named defendant consented – first did not – communications sought between first named defendants in relation to taking leave during team building periods – disproportionate – names and positions of all persons notified of and who participated in the exercise irrelevant and a matter for particulars – evaluation of equipment used by plaintiff allowed so long as such is not covered by other categories – statements made by individuals in relation to accident report specific and not disproportionate – all feedback related to ‘away days’ too general, category altered to all safety related feedback – all documentation related to ‘away days’ too general – plaintiff’s personnel file limited to such documents as are relevant to the first named defendant’s claims of contributory negligence and the plaintiff’s pre-existing condition - enquiries made by first named defendant into second named defendants expertise unnecessary as covered by other conditions – choice of mountain irrelevant – communications between first named defendant and HSE entirely reasonable