It is ironic that a State agency can go back years to chase people who evade tax but citizens injured by medical negligence cannot pursue a claim for damages unless they act within three years, Ms Rosemary Cunningham said yesterday.
Speaking after she lost her right to sue the former Drogheda obstetrician, Dr Michael Neary, the Cavan woman said she felt the law should be changed to allow people injured as a result of medical negligence more time to lodge claims.
She said while three years might seem a reasonable period within which a claim may be lodged, by the time a person comes to terms with what has happened to them and found the courage to pursue a claim, years may have passed.
There are, however, proposals to shorten rather than lengthen the time-frame for lodging claims.
Ms Cunningham said she was disappointed by the Supreme Court judgment but hoped it would not discourage other women who allege they were damaged by Dr Neary from taking cases against him. Dr Neary was struck off the medical register last year for unnecessarily removing the wombs of 10 patients.
The Minister for Health, Mr Martin, said last evening he would have to study the implications of the judgment.
Patient Focus, the group representing more than 100 women who allege they were harmed by Dr Neary, said the judgment would not discourage other women from taking claims.
Spokeswoman Ms Fidelma Geraghty said she believed a lot of cases pending were not statute-barred. She urged Mr Martin to set up a redress tribunal to compensate women whose cases were statute-barred or who could not take cases at all because their medical records were missing.
Mr Martin said that issue had not yet been contemplated.
"Obviously this decision today to a certain extent creates a new situation. Now we are going to have to study that judgment first of all before we draw any hasty conclusions, and it's a matter that would be for the consideration of wider government as well," he said.
And in response to Ms Geraghty's claim that he had told Patient Focus the statute of limitations clock would only have started ticking on the day that Dr Neary was struck off in 2003, the Minister said he could not have given such an assurance.
There might have been "a misunderstanding", Mr Martin said, pointing out that only the Supreme Court could decide such issues.