Midlands farmer awarded compensation after being gored by bull at mart

A Midlands farmer who was gored by a young bull at a mart five years ago has been awarded €75,000 in the High Court.

Fergus Malone took an action against Edenderry Livestock Mart after he sustained five broken ribs and severe soft tissue damage on August 5, 2017 when the animal charged at him.

In his judgment, Mr Justice Ferriter said the farmer suffered “nasty injuries” and was left with the longer-term damage of an injury to his left shoulder and psychological damage including ongoing PTSD symptoms.

Edenderry Livestock Mart fully denied liability and called five witnesses, one of whom, Laurence O’Brien, was credited by Mr Malone with saving his life as he, along with Jack Hayes and another man, diverted the bull and got the farmer to safety after he had been attacked.

The other witnesses for the defence were Liam Byrne, the only mart employee present when the incident occurred, Martin Sullivan and Alvin Wallace.

The mart’s essential case, Mr Justice Ferriter said, was that there was no negligence on its part in terms of the systems it had in place in the mart on the day.

In any event, the mart claimed, Mr Malone was entirely the author of his own misfortune in that the bull attacked the farmer after he was provoked by Mr Malone hitting him on the head with a stick.

Creeslough explosion: Liverpool FC 'deeply saddened' at death of young fan Leona Harper

14-year-old Leona Harper was one ten people to lose their lives in an explosion in Creeslough on Friday

Gardai issue public appeal to help find missing Midlands man

Mr Malone strongly denied that he was the author of his own misfortune and laid the blame for the accident instead on the mart for bringing about a situation where animals were being funnelled back into the pen in which the farmer was standing.

At that time Mr Malone had been asked to steer bulls out of that pen, resulting in the bull in question becoming “spooked” and charging at the farmer.

Mr Justice Ferriter concluded that Mr Malone's account of the events was the most accurate and reliable and he did not believe that he hit the bull and thereby provoked the attack as alleged by a number of the mart’s witnesses.

Insofar as the farmer used his stick against the bull, the court took the view that on the balance of probabilities, he did so after the bull became spooked or agitated and charged at him.

Fergus Malone had unloaded cattle at the mart at 5.30am, had gone back home to milk cows, and then returned to the mart with a second load of cattle at about 9.30am.

In his judgment, Mr Justice Ferriter said that when he had finished unloading that second load of cattle in the mart, he met his brother, Joseph Malone, who had also arrived to unload a consignment of “some six or so young bulls (who were Aberdeen Angus and Limousin bulls of about twelve to eighteen months age).”

Liam Byrne was the only mart staff member dealing with animals arriving in the arrival or holding pens and when Joseph Malone was temporarily distracted, Mr Byrne asked Fergus Malone to help him drive his brother’s animals from the holding pen into the runway area.

One of the animals blocked a chute and there was then a logjam. Fergus Malone's evidence was that he was seeking to get the remaining couple of animals out of the holding pen area and into the runway area when one of the animals, who was on the way back into the holding pen, made for him.

The judgment outlined that the animals had all stopped and Fergus Malone said in evidence: “The next minute there was a lad come running up along the side and his tongue out roaring. He hit me and drove me back into the corner. And I tried to hit him or I don’t know whether I did hit him or not in self-defence to save my life at that stage but I mustn’t have got a right clatter at him because I would have broke the stick. But he gored me in the corner and knelt on me and destroyed me.”

The court found Mr Malone to be a wholly credible witness and honest and frank in his evidence and recounting of events as best he remembered them.

He was “crystal clear” that his stick was only used in self-defence and that he did not hit the young bull on the forehead before the animal charged him as claimed by a number of the defendant’s witnesses.

Fergus Malone gave evidence that, in his long life as a farmer, he had never hit an animal the way he was alleged by the mart’s witnesses. He said that it would have been very foolhardy of him to hit a young bull on the head in that manner as that would only provoke the animal.

“I accept that the plaintiff was an experienced farmer who knew how to handle himself around young bulls and would not and did not hit the young bull other then in self-defence,” said Mr Justice Ferriter.

An agricultural consultant expert, James Kirwan, gave evidence for Mr Malone and expressed the view that the mart was short-staffed at the time of the accident in circumstances where there was only one staff member available to deal with Mr Malone’s brother’s animals from the holding pen through the runway and chute process.

Mr Kirwan's view was that there would normally be two to three staff for this purpose.

The court accepted his view that the mart takes over responsibility of the animals from the point of their discharge by their owner into the arrival/holding pen.

Mr Kirwan also expressed the view that it would not be unusual for an animal to get stuck in the chute area in which case the appropriate process was to circle the animals back in the runway to get them sorted out to re-enter the chute. He said that, in doing so, it would be important to have the gate from the holding pen into the chute closed.

It was also the consultant's opinion that if there had been sufficiently experienced staff on duty in the morning, they would have ensured to shut the gate from the holding pen into the chute once there was an issue in the chute.

Mr Justice Ferriter said: “Mr Kirwan expressed the opinion, which I accept, that the failure to operate proper systems on the day of the accident was the cause of [Fergus Malone] being exposed in the very damaging way he was to the risk of attack by the young bull.”

The farmer spent 10 days in Tullamore Hospital after the attack.

“He experienced severe pain and sleep disturbance and nightmares in the months following the accident. It was some three months before he could do any work at all on the farm,” said Mr Justice Ferriter.

“He gave evidence that his ability to do any heavy work with his left shoulder has been significantly compromised since the accident. He is unable to milk his cattle properly or lift heavy objects. He gets help from his wife and from neighbours.”

The court said it was important to note that the case predated the recently introduced Personal Injuries Guidelines and he assessed damages by reference to the principles applicable prior to the introduction of those guidelines.

Granard to roll out red carpet for Longford's All-Ireland Fleadh winner

Longford choir sings Sweet songs

The Sweet Memories Choir entwines the therapeutic qualities of music and social gathering as Thomas Lyons found out when he attended one of their rehearsals at The Sin Bin, Longford

He ruled that Mr Malone was entitled to €45,000 compensation “for pain and suffering to date”.

He added: “Given that he is likely to have residual limitations in his left shoulder for the foreseeable future which will continue to impact significantly on his ability to work as a farmer, given that he is still suffering some PTSD symptoms and sleeping issues, and given that he is still at 53 a relatively young man, in my view, an appropriate level of compensation for pain and suffering into the future is €30,000.

“In the circumstances, I will make a total award of damages to the plaintiff in the sum of €75,000.”