What Is Linda Quirke In A Car Accident

Introduction This case concerns the involvement of Linda Quirke in a car accident caused by her former friend, Amy Sheridan. Amy was found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol after a night out despite initially agreeing to act as the designated driver. Linda wishes to appeal the High Court’s ruling which found her guilty of contributory negligence, consequently reducing her award of damages by 50%, pursuant to section 34(1) of the Civil Liability Act 1961 . Linda objects on two grounds. Firstly she argues that “a reasonable person would not have known that Amy was impaired by alcohol” and secondly on the grounds that “the court did not take into account the severity of her back injuries in determining the award made”. I will

In Hussey v. Twomey the plaintiff spent the night within close proximity of the defendant who had been drinking. However for Linda, this was not the case. She did not spend the night with Amy or any of the three other girls who travelled with them as they were all separated upon entering the large pub/club. As a result of this separation Linda could not have

Garda David Mullins and the doctors on duty described Amy as being visibly drunk as she was unsteady on her feet and slurred her speech. This description of Amy’s state was heavily relied upon but wrongly so. It was deemed that Linda should have known that Amy had been drinking as both Garda David Mullins and the doctors, considered reasonable people in this case, recognised her intoxication. However this encounter occurred after Amy took two shots of whiskey to calm her nerves after the accident. It is undeniable that this additional alcohol heightened her level of intoxication thus explaining her inebriated state in A&E. It therefore would be considered unfair to disregard Linda’s description of Amy’s state in favour of Garda David Mullins’s and the doctors’ as they did not see her prior to these shots, which was the lesser state of intoxication in which Linda found her before getting into the car with her. This again contrasts greatly with the case of the plaintiff in Hussey v. Twomey wherein the defendant is not known to have consumed any additional alcohol after the accident occurred. Gardaí arrived at the scene at 12.20am with the accident occurring only ten minutes after they had left the premises. Garda Ruttle then tracked the car to its registered address and knocked until the second defendant answered. In his description of the second defendant Garda Ruttle stated: “His eyes were