A DUBLIN man is to be plaid £100,000 by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal pending the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court, the High Court heard yesterday. The tribunal is considering whether to bring an appeal.
A week ago, Miss Justice Carroll in the High Court directed the tribunal to reconsider the claim of Mr Eamonn Gavin (53), of Orwell Park Green, Templeogue, Dublin.
Mr Gavin claimed a £100,000 award to him by the tribunal was too low and that he should be awarded well above that figure.
Mr Gavin claimed his life had been shattered since he tried to prevent the theft of his car 12 bears ago. He was subjected to severe assault by the perpetrators trying to dislodge him from the bonnet of his car. His claim was lodged with the tribunal in respect of injuries suffered as a result of the crime.
It was agreed in court yesterday that the judge's order of last week should be stayed with the exception of the £100,000 payment, pending a possible appeal.
Earlier yesterday, Mr Gerard Durcan SC, for the tribunal, said it wished to consider the judgment and see whether it wished to appeal. He said that if the judge made an order quashing the tribunal decision, save insofar as it had awarded £100,000 compensation, and remitted the case to the tribunal to assess final compensation, it could pay £100 000 to Mr Gavin immediately or relatively immediately.
Mr Paul O'Higgins SC, Tor MrGavin, said his client, having spent many years involved in the litigation, was desperate for finality of some kind. He felt that if paid the £100,000 now (pending an appeal), there was very little he could do with it in the circumstances as he would not positively know if he would have to give some of it back.
His most pressing concern was to purchase a house for himself and family. If he got the money he could not spend it on anything by way of long term plans for living accommodation. He was very concerned that the matter be disposed of as quickly as possible.
The judge said she was disposed to granting a stay on terms. Following a consultation with Mr Gavin, Mr O'Higgins said his client hoped a stay would not slow the ultimate resolution.
Mr Durcan said the case was important as it was the first in which there had been a decision dealing in such detail with the issues as to how compensation was arrived at and what factors had to be taken into account.
Miss Justice Carroll said she would grant the stay if payment of £100,000 was made and on the basis that the appeal would be taken promptly and be prosecuted as quickly as possible.