A Garda who suffered a cut finger during a struggle with a person wielding a knife has lost his High Court challenge to the refusal of the Minister for Justice to consider him eligible for compensation under the Garda Compensation Scheme.
Garda Mark Looby had brought proceedings against the Minister for Justice Equity and Law Reform over the refusal in August 2008 to allow him seek compensation under the scheme.
The refusal, made on grounds his injuries were minor and sustained during the performance of a duty not involving special risk, was unreasonable, he claimed.
Dismissing Garda Looby’s challenge today, Mr Justice John Hedigan ruled the Minister’s decision “was far from being irrational” and was, in the judge’s view, “the only one open to the Minister on the evidence before him”.
The judge noted Garda Looby suffered a cut to his left index finger during the course of a struggle with an individual armed with a knife. The individual had been threatening a member of the public at Fleet Street, Dublin on August 14th 2001 and
Garda Looby, off duty at the time, informed the individual he was a Garda and ordered him to put down the knife.
When the individual refused to comply, a struggle ensued and Garda Looby suffered an injury. The Garda later received a tetanus injection because the knife penetrated his skin. Blood tests were also conducted and proved negative for infectious
diseases.
In early 2002, Garda Looby applied for compensation in respect of the cut to his finger and also for anxiety. In 2008, he was informed by the Department of Justice leave to apply to the High Court for compensation was being refused.
In his High Court action, Garda Looby claimed that refusal was unreasonable because his injuries were not minor, were sustained in the course of duties which involved special risk and were also due to malice.
The Minister argued the Garda’s injuries were superficial and submitted adequate reasons for refusal of eligibility for compensation had been given.
Mr Justice Hedigan said the 1941 Garda Compensation Act provides the Minister shall refuse eligibility for compensation applications if he believes the injuries at issue are minor and not sustained during the performance of a duty involving special risk.
The issue in this case was the difference between the risk faced by a Garda on normal duty and a Garda on a duty involving special risk, he said. The Garda Commissioner has set out a working definition of “duty involving special risk,” which confirmed ordinary Garda duties did not constitute a special risk duty situation.
In this case, Garda Looby, while off duty, would have been considered under the scheme to have been a Garda on ordinary duty. In the circumstances, the Minister’s only option was to refuse Garda Looby’s application, he ruled.