Man who intervened in dole office 'hanging' loses injury appeal

A MAN has lost a High Court bid to secure damages for injuries suffered when he intervened to stop a man hanging himself and …

A MAN has lost a High Court bid to secure damages for injuries suffered when he intervened to stop a man hanging himself and his son with a chain in a Dublin dole office.

Noel Brazil (54), a taxi driver, Conquer Hill Road, Clontarf, Dublin, had appealed against the Circuit Court’s finding that the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs had no liability for his injuries.

Mr Brazil claimed he ruptured a muscle in his chest when he helped to take the strain of the 6ft 6in man, who had a child in his arms, in a bid to stop a chain snapping around their necks. He sued the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs over the incident in Cumberland Street Employment Exchange where he was waiting to pick up a fare.

Last year, Circuit Civil Court Judge Jacqueline Linnane ruled the attempted double hanging happened so fast it could not have been anticipated by the defendant.

READ MORE

Mr Brazil appealed that decision to the High Court. Mr Justice John Edwards yesterday dismissed the appeal after finding Mr Brazil had failed to discharge the burden of proof to sustain the claim and also awarded costs against him.

In his claim, Mr Brazil said he had been waiting in the social welfare office when a heated dispute broke out between a very tall, heavy-set man and a member of staff. The man had produced a chain and had shouted: “You won’t starve me and my family. I will kill myself and my family first.”

He took his young son in his arms, stood up on a chair, wrapped a chain around both their necks and attached it to a bracket on a pillar. Mr Brazil said he saw the chair wobble as the man, not identified in court, attempted to kick it from under him. He said he ran to help and took the weight of both the man and the child until staff came to his aid.

Mr Brazil said he had ruptured a muscle in his chest because of the incident and had to have an old hip prosthesis renewed earlier than doctors had planned.

In dismissing the appeal, Mr Justice Edwards said, while there had been an argument about sufficiency of security at the welfare office, it was important to bear in mind this happened in 2000 when concerns about occurrences like this were not as great.

While the risk of such incidents might be reasonably foreseen under present conditions, this had happened nearly nine years ago, he said. The onus on the Minister to carry out a risk assessment of the premises had to be considered in the light of the time the incident occurred.

Over the last 10 years, the authorities in various venues had improved security because of serious incidents involving disaffected members of the public, the judge added. It had been argued in this case, even if a security man was in place, security would have been advised to wait until gardaí arrived because they were dealing with a man armed with a weapon, a chain, the judge added.