A man who was exposed to asbestos dust while working in the basement of Leinster House has been directed by the Supreme Court to return a damages award of £48,700 made to him by the High Court.
Mr Stephen Fletcher must also pay the costs of his legal action for damages, which was regarded as a test case, the outcome of which is likely to adversely affect decisions about whether some 3,000 similar claims will proceed.
The five-judge Supreme Court made the costs and damages repayment order yesterday when dealing with applications in relation to Mr Fletcher's and four other cases taken by persons arising out of exposure to asbestos.
In relation to three of those cases, the court directed the three claimants could keep their awards. That decision was made on the basis that the State had not challenged liability in those cases and they had proceeded as an assessment of damages only. The fifth case addresses the issue of whether aggravated damages are payable and the court has yet to give judgment on that.
The applications arose following the Supreme Court's unanimous decision last month allowing an appeal by the Commissioners of Public Works against the £48,700 award to Mr Fletcher arising from his exposure to asbestos dust while working in the basement of Leinster House in the 1980s.
In that decision, the Supreme Court held the law should not be extended by the courts to allow plaintiffs recover damages for psychiatric injury "resulting from an irrational fear of contracting a disease because of their negligent exposure to health risks by their employers, where their risk is characterised by their medical advisers as very remote".
The commissioners had not disputed the High Court findings regarding their failure to take proper precautions for Mr Fletcher's health and safety resulting in his being unnecessarily and without his knowledge exposed to significant quantities of asbestos dust and, therefore, subject to a very remote risk of contracting mesothelioma (a form of lung cancer).
The commissioners did not challenge the High Court finding that, after being told of that state of affairs, Mr Fletcher suffered a psychiatyric illness. However, they argued the High Court had wrongly held Mr Fletcher was entitled to recover damages in respect of that psychiatric illness, when unaccompanied by any physical injury.
Mr Fletcher (55), Maplewood Road, Springfield, Tallaght, Dublin, worked as a general operative and assisted in removing lagging from pipes at Leinster House. Mr Fletcher was not told of the dangers of working in such a situation. In June 2001, the High Court awarded damages of £48,700 and costs to him, which decision was overturned last month by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court adjourned Mr Fletcher's case and four others to yesterday to allow lawyers to consider the implications of the judgment.
Yesterday, Mr Michael Hanna SC, for Mr Fletcher, urged the Supreme Court not to make the usual order on costs in relation to a successful appeal, which would be to award the costs to the commissioners against Mr Fletcher.
The Chief Justice, Mr Justice Keane, presiding, said the court had concluded costs should follow the event. While the case was of considerable importance, it was not one where the court should make no order on costs or award costs to the unsuccessful litigants.