High Court of Ireland Decisions

1. Garda Shiels sustained injury while on duty when he was stabbed with a needle into the back of the right hand while escorting prisoners from Monaghan Courthouse to Mountjoy. At about 5 p.m. on the 9th January, 1996 - just over 5 years ago - one of the prisoners, having somehow removed the handcuffs which restrained him, attacked another member of the Gardai with a syringe which contained blood like fluid. In coming to the aid of his colleague, Garda Shiels received a needle stick injury. Garda Shiels, in his grounding affidavit, describes the incident as follows:-

2. On the return to Dublin, Garda Shiels was treated for his injury at the Mater Hospital. In his evidence, Garda Shiels said he was not aware that he had been stabbed until he was medically examined. He was then given a dose of Hepatitis C vaccination. In his evidence before this Court he said he ascertained within a week that his assailant was not HIV positive.

3. On the 15th of February, 1996 five weeks after the incident Garda Shiels and his wife consulted with Dr. Fiona Mulcahy MD/FRCPI.

4. There are two reports one dated the 2nd April 1996, three months after the incident and the second dated the 26th November 1996, 10 months thereafter.

5. In the first report Dr. Mulcahy was of the opinion that the Applicant suffered a significant injury following the assault and put the transmission risk following such a needle stick injury with HIV positive blood to be 1 in 300 in respect of fresh blood. The risk in relation to the acquisition of Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C is respectively 1 in 3 and 1 in 33 in relation to fresh blood. Accordingly the main concern for the Applicant at that time was the acquisition of either Hepatitis B or C.

6. In relation to the latter report, the testing for HIV and both Hepatitis types having been confirmed as negative, her opinion is that the Applicant suffered significant anxiety as a result of the assault and could not be adequately be reassured for 6 months. At the time of that report the applicant could be categorically reassured that he has not acquired any of those viruses as a result of that incident. She adds that this did not detract from the significant anxiety therein referred to.

7. In his direct evidence, Garda Shiels says that he is now getting over the trauma. He has been transferred to other duties and is not dealing with the public. He is due to retire in August 2002.

8. Dr. Edmund McHale’s report concluded that the overall pattern of symptoms and behaviour indicate post traumatic stress disorder. Dr. McHale classified this as a severe reaction to the accumulated effects of past stressful experiences, culminating in this most recent event. This was life threatening and damaging to the physical/sexual self esteem of the Applicant. In his report dated the 5th August, 1997 he recommended a change of work.

9. Dr. McHale’s second report, dated the 11th of July, 2000 concluded that the overall pattern of symptoms and behaviours suggested that the Applicant continued to experience consequences to the assault which might not be immediately apparent but which had a pervasive impact upon his life. These included a low grade depression, reflected in a loss of purpose and an inability to engage actively and meaningfully in relationships and a loss of worth regarding his work contribution and his general sense of self in marked contrast to his earlier personality.

10. In cross-examination the Applicant says that he has improved.

11. The Garda surgeons report dated the 9th March, 1998 classified the incident as serious for reasons of the six months reactive anxiety on the part of the Applicant and his wife. In the Garda surgeons opinion the Applicant was perfectly healthy at the time of the consultation and he believed there would be no sequelae or consequential disability.

12. Mr. Shane Murphy SC, for the Applicant, stressed the significant risk of significant injury when the source of blood was unknown. Even where the Applicant knew shortly after the incident that the prisoner tested negative, the source of blood in the syringe was unknown. There was accordingly, considerable anxiety which was exacerbated by the knowledge last year of the provenance of the needle which had been hidden in the prisoners rectum.

13. There would seem to me to be three aspects of the damages suffered by the Applicant: a needle stick injury with blood of unknown origin: post traumatic stress due to the accumulated effects of past stressful experiences which culminated in the needle stick injury; an exacerbation of stress resulting from the knowledge of the applicant’s awareness of where the needle was hidden.

14. Garda Shiels exhibited bravness in coming to the aid of a colleague in the confines of the Garda van. The needle stick injury caused a delayed stress which flared up on the discovery of where the needle had been secreted during the journey. It is clear that, had there been no needle injury that there would have been no anxiety for the initial six months and for the flaring up of the anxiety last year.

15. In the circumstances I would award compensation in the sum of £25,000.00 together with agreed special damages of £380. There will, accordingly be a decree in the sum of £25,380.