Decisive legal representation across commercial and construction litigation, personal injury claims, debt recovery, defective product liability, and the enforcement of court judgments.
Relentless case preparation and structured navigation through the Injuries Resolution Board (formerly PIAB) and court litigation to secure fair compensation for injuries.
Fast, systematic recovery paths for outstanding commercial balances via statutory demands, District, Circuit, or High Court debt collection procedures.
High-stakes legal advocacy for enterprise contract breaches, shareholder disputes, partnership breakdowns, and intense commercial equity actions.
Representing contractors, developers, and owners in complex structural defects, payment disputes, delays, adjudications, and conciliations.
Advocating for consumers or companies facing losses from failed manufacturing, harmful designs, or failure to comply with Irish and EU product safety regimes.
Transforming court wins into tangible recoveries using judgment mortgages, Sheriff orders, garnishee attachments, and installment processing rules.
The Injuries Resolution Board's current timeline for the assessment of a claim, in most cases, is 9 months.
The Injuries Resolution Board issues an ‘Order to Pay’. This has a similar status as a Court award. A settlement cheque will be issued by the respondent/insurer.
The respondent is ordered to pay the compensation. In practice, it is usual for the respondent’s insurance company to make the payment.
If you already received welfare benefits when out of work due to the accident, the respondent will be required to reimburse the Minister for Social Protection certain welfare payments. The Notice of Assessment will set out the amount due to you on acceptance of the award and the amount due to the Minister for Social Protection.
In general, no.
You will receive a document called an authorisation issued by the Injuries Resolution Board that will allow you to pursue your claim through the Courts.
A summary summons is a fast-track legal process designed for straightforward claims or debt collection cases where the debtor has no valid defence. Instead of a traditional, drawn-out court trial involving oral testimony and cross-examinations, this procedure allows a claim to be resolved quickly by a judge substantially on the basis of written statements (called affidavits) and official documentation.
Following an important Supreme Court decision (O’Malley), a business cannot simply state a single total lump sum that it claims is owed. The written claim must provide specific details outlining exactly how the debt was calculated and where it originated. This breakdown must be clear enough to allow the person who owes the money to understand the math behind it and properly decide whether or not to contest it.
No. To stop an immediate summary judgment and move the case to a full trial (called a plenary hearing), the debtor must do more than just make a broad denial. They have a strict legal duty to show a believable, realistic, or "stateable" defence. The obligation cuts both ways: just as the claimant must fully detail the debt, the debtor must provide clear grounds for their defence.
The main goal of the court is to restore the injured property owner or business back to the exact position they would have been in if the building contract had been performed perfectly. When deciding how much money to award for repairs, the court looks closely at the "reasonableness" of the proposed repair plan. This includes analysing how much the plan costs compared to alternative options, its practical advantages, and whether the owner genuinely intends to carry out the repair work.
Yes. You can potentially claim general damages for the inconvenience and distress caused by highly intrusive, loud, or messy building works. For example, in a High Court case (McGee v Alcorn), a family with three young children who had to endure highly disruptive, noisy construction repairs was awarded €25,000 specifically to compensate for the emotional strain and daily hassle.
Product liability compensation awards can encompass very substantial figures for both pain and suffering ("general damages") and financial losses like medical bills or missed work ("special damages"). For instance, in a prominent Irish High Court case involving recalled hip implant devices (O'Sullivan v DePuy International Limited), the plaintiff was awarded €300,000 in general damages and an additional €482,455 in special damages to resolve the claim.
Or reach out directly via email: