The Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB) is likely to appeal yesterday's High Court judgment stating it must deal directly with lawyers acting for claimants if asked to do so.
The judgment, which has been warmly welcomed by representatives of the legal professions, found that the PIAB's policy of communicating directly with claimants, and refusing to deal with their solicitors, was outside the powers given to it by the Act setting it up.
Mr Justice McMenamin ruled that a person had the right to legal representation even in administrative procedures, when the matters involved were "of serious consequence or impinged upon their rights".
This right was not confined to court appearances, he said. It also arose in each of the steps which are "necessary, ancillary and preliminary to the bringing of court proceedings".
A claimant seeking compensation for a personal injury must first go to the PIAB, even if the case will eventually end up in court. If liability is being contested, the PIAB registers the fact that it received the claim, before releasing it to go to the court.
In this case Mr Declan O'Brien, a de-boner in a meat factory, suffered an injury to his back when a carcass fell on him.
He sought advice from a solicitor, Mr Denis Boland, who wrote to the PIAB on his behalf. He needed registration of the claim with the PIAB before the case would fall because it was out of time under the Statute of Limitations.
The PIAB wrote back to Mr O'Brien, not Mr Boland, and he formed the impression that it was refusing to deal with his solicitor.
During the case, the PIAB explained its policy of dealing directly with claimants, sending copies of correspondence to solicitors only if asked to do so.
In his judgment Mr Justice McMenamin said that the procedures for pursuing claims before the PIAB were in many ways analogous to the steps necessary prior to the initiation of court proceedings.
The consequences of failing to comply with certain legal requirements could be fatal to the claimant's case. The PIAB's procedures, because of their complexity, importance and potential consequences, justified the right to legal representation identified by Mr O'Brien.
The PIAB's chairwoman, Ms Dorothea Dowling, said the board would meet to discuss the judgment. "We'll have to appeal it," she added. There were "quantum leaps" in the judgment that did not follow, and she stressed that the balance between strong and weak did not arise, as there was no litigation involved. Many claimants were going to the PIAB without legal representation, and would continue to receive a good service from it.