Breslin (Martin and Christopher) v Michael Colm Murphy and Seamus Daly
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Girvan LJ |
| Judgment Date | 19 December 2013 |
| Neutral Citation | [2013] NICA 75 |
| Year | 2013 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 19 December 2013 |
1
Neutral Citation No. [2013] NICA 75
Ref:
GIR9074
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
Delivered:
19/12/13
(subject to editorial corrections)*
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
________
BETWEEN:
MARTIN AND CHRISTOPHER BRESLIN (BY HIMSELF AND ON
BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF GERALDINE BRESLIN)
CATHERINA ANNE GALLAGHER
MICHAEL JAMES GALLAGHER (BY HIMSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF THE ESTATE OF ADRIAN GALLAGHER)
EDMUND WILLIAM GIBSON
STANLEY JAMES McCOMBE (BY HIMSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF THE ESTATE OF ANN McCOMBE)
MARIAN ELAINE RADFORD (BY HERSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF THE ESTATE OF ALAN RADFORD)
PAUL WILLIAM RADFORD
COLIN DAVID JAMES WILSON
DENISE FRANCESCA WILSON
GARY GODFREY CHARLES WILSON
GERALDINE ANN WILSON (BY HERSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF THE ESTATE OF LORRAINE WILSON)
GODFREY DAVID WILSON (BY HIMSELF AND ON BEHALF
OF THE ESTATE OF LORRAINE WILSON)
Plaintiffs/Respondents
AND
MICHAEL COLM MURPHY
SEAMUS DALY
Appellants/Defendants
________
Before: HIGGINS LJ, GIRVAN LJ, COGHLIN LJ
________
2
GIRVAN LJ (delivering the judgment of the Court)
Introduction
[1] This is an appeal brought by the appellants who challenge the judgment of
Gillen J (“the trial judge”) delivered on 20 March 2013 whereby the trial judge found
each of the appellants jointly and severally liable in the action brought by the
plaintiffs, the respondents to the appeal (“the plaintiffs”), in which they claimed
damages for trespass to the person. The plaintiffs’ claims arose out of the bomb
explosion in Omagh County Tyrone which occurred on 15 August 1998. The claim
includes damages for personal injuries sustained as a result of the explosion and
claims for damages under the Fatal Accidents (Northern Ireland) Order 1977 and the
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (Northern Ireland) 1937 in respect of the
deaths of members of their families.
[2] In both the appeal and the trial Mr Fee QC appeared with Ms McMahon on
behalf of the first-named defendant (“Murphy”). Ms Higgins QC appeared with Mr
Sharp on behalf of the second defendant (“Daly”) and likewise appeared at the trial.
Mr Lockhart QC and Dr McGleenan QC appeared for the plaintiffs on the appeal,
having appeared with Lord Brennan at the trial. The court is grateful to counsel for
their helpful written and oral submissions.
[3] The proceedings were originally tried by Morgan J who concluded that the
plaintiffs were entitled to succeed in their claims against a number of defendants,
including Murphy and Daly. Murphy and Daly succeeded in their appeal from
Morgan J’s judgment. In its judgment reported at [2011] NICA 33 in the first appeal
(“the first appeal”) this Court ordered a retrial of the claims against Murphy and
Daly. The Court did make clear that it was not ordering a retrial on the issue of
quantum of damages. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court having been refused by
the Court of Appeal petitions were presented to the Supreme Court on behalf of the
plaintiffs and Daly on various points of law arising from the judgment in the first
appeal. The Supreme Court refused leave to appeal. No leave was sought to
challenge the Court of Appeal’s ruling in its judgment on the issue of the pleaded
cause of action, trespass to the person.
[4] As the trial judge clearly stated, a retrial is conceptually wholly independent
of the first trial. The rulings of the judge at the first trial were not res judicata and
were not binding at the fresh trial which was in substance a trial de novo (see
paragraph [4] of the trial judge’s judgment). In paragraph [5] the trial judge stated
that full recognition had to be given to the fact that the retrial was a de novo hearing.
As appears later in this judgment, Ms Higgins argued that, notwithstanding those
statements made by the trial judge, in fact the judge failed to follow his own criterion
of ensuring that this was treated entirely as a fresh de novo hearing of the action as
far as it affected Daly.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
Gavin McKenna v Ministry of Defence
...court in an appeal of this nature are well settled. Some brief citation of authority will suffice for this purpose. In Breslin v Murphy [2013] NICA 75 this court, differently constituted, stated at para [8]: “In this Court’s decision in the first appeal we set out at paragraphs [6]-[10] the......
-
Chinacast Education Corporation And Others v Chan Tze Ngon And Others
...the dangers of relying on circumstantial evidence to establish one’s case, referring to the following paragraph in Breslin v Murphy [2013] NICA 75 at “Both civil and criminal cases can depend on circumstantial evidence. In the context of a civil law tort claim circumstantial evidence involv......