High Court awards €45,000 general damages for permanent tooth loss, departing from Personal Injuries Guidelines due to unique suffering.
Ireland (IE)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court awarded the plaintiff €55,300 in general and special damages following a trial on damages only where defendants did not appear. Expert evidence confirmed irreversible bone damage and the inevitable loss of six lower front teeth over the next decade, causing ongoing pain and infection. The judge departed from the Personal Injuries Guidelines, reasoning that the maximum guideline sum would be unjustly low given the prolonged nature of the suffering and treatment required.
Legislator headnote
AI generateds. 1 of the Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021; The court may depart from the Personal Injuries Guidelines where the specific circumstances of the injury and the resulting suffering justify an award that is fair and proportionate to the actual impact on the plaintiff.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
THE HIGH COURT
[2026] IEHC 461
[Record No. 2022/3207 P]
BETWEEN
ANA ALAJBEG
PLAINTIFF
-AND-
CARLOS NETO
-AND-
PRO-RISO DENTAL CLINIC LIMITED
DEFENDANTS
Ex tempore judgment of Mr Justice Paul Coffey delivered on the 8th day of July 2026
1. The plaintiff in this case is a Croatian national who was born on 29 August 1982. Her claim for damages arises from the negligence of the defendants in providing dental care and treatment to her between November 2018 and August 2020, the purpose of which was to align her upper and lower teeth with fixed braces, where the purpose of the lower brace was to push the lower teeth forward so as to reduce an overbite caused by a skeletal discrepancy.
2. As a result of orders made by this Court on 18 October 2023 and 28 July 2025, the matter comes before the Court for trial on an assessment of damages basis only.
3. Evidence was given by the plaintiff and by her dental expert, Dr Ian Hutchinson, dental surgeon. The evidence was not challenged as neither defendant appeared at the trial.
4. The expert evidence establishes that the effect of the wrongdoing of the defendants was to push six of the plaintiff's lower front teeth out of the jawbone. This has caused irreversible damage to the bone and loss of support for those teeth, with the consequence that it is only a matter of time before they fall out. Based on his examination of the plaintiff in 2022, Dr Hutchinson predicts that she will lose these teeth over the next five to ten years, although that process could be accelerated by intervening trauma from whatever source.
5. The plaintiff's evidence establishes that she has undergone an ordeal of pain and suffering which began in 2020 and continues to the present day. Her suffering has been compounded by recurring infections at intervals of approximately three months, which are continuing. During this time, she has also undergone numerous dental treatments, which are themselves continuing. The overall effect has caused her considerable stress and has adversely affected her sleep, her enjoyment of life and her work as a structural engineer.
6. The plaintiff will require ongoing dental treatment, the likely cost of which has been estimated by Dr Hutchinson at €10,300.
7. The assessment of damages in this case is governed by the Personal Injuries Guidelines adopted by the Judicial Council on 6 March 2021, under which a court, when assessing general damages for personal injuries, is obliged to have regard to the Guidelines whilst at all times adhering to the principles governing the assessment and award of damages for personal injuries as determined by the Superior Courts.
8. Those principles require the trial judge to arrive at an award which is fair to all parties and proportionate. The principle of fairness requires the Court to take full account of the impact of the relevant injury on the plaintiff, but only to the extent that her suffering is properly attributable to the wrongdoing of the defendants. The principle of proportionality requires that the award be proportionate to the maximum and equivalent awards available under the Guidelines and to awards made by the courts in directly comparable cases.
9. Senior Counsel for the plaintiff submits, and I accept that the case falls within para. 9(F) of the Guidelines which deals with damage to teeth, under the heading (i) “Loss of or serious damage to several front teeth”, for which the applicable bracket is €12,500 to €30,500.
10. It seems to me that the relevant Guideline, as formulated, fails to capture the true nature and extent of the plaintiff's suffering in this case. The plaintiff is likely to lose six of her lower front teeth over a considerable period of time and, before she loses them, will have to endure ongoing pain and suffering associated with loosened and unstable lower teeth, recurring infections and the need for continuing, complicated and invasive dental treatment. The prolonged nature of this process, and the associated stress and treatment, will significantly discommode the plaintiff in her daily life over that period.
11. Were I merely to award the plaintiff the maximum sum of €30,500 provided for under the relevant heading, I would be required to make an unjust award because there would be no reasonable proportion between the award provided for under the Guidelines and the award which would otherwise appropriately reflect all of the relevant aggravating factors in this case, as outlined above. I am therefore satisfied that a departure from the Guidelines is justified for these reasons.
12. I will accordingly depart from the Guidelines and award the plaintiff a sum of €45,000 in general damages for all of her pain and suffering both to date and into the future. To that sum must be added special damages of €10,300.
13. There will therefore be an award in favour of the plaintiff in the sum of €55,300.