Are Post-accident Medical Records Discoverable

Background

The provision of post-accident medical records has always been a battleground for Plaintiff and defence practitioners.  In the recent case of James Egan v Castlerea Co-Operative Livestock Mart LTD [2023] IEHC 16 Mr Justice Twomey explored the importance of post-accident discovery of medical records.

The Plaintiff alleged that he sustained an injury to his left shin as a result of an incident involving a bullock on 13 November 2017.  The Defendant's sought access to the Plaintiff's post-accident medical records relating to the injury and this was opposed by the Plaintiff on the basis that it was unnecessary for the fair disposal of the case.

The Principle

The court applied the principles of relevance and necessity to ascertain if the post-accident records should be disclosed:
 

In order to understand the extent of the injuries claimed by the Plaintiff one would assume that medical records such as x-rays, MRI's and consultant notes would be best placed to give evidence of those injuries. Not only are they relevant to show the injuries claimed by the Plaintiff but also to show other injuries that may not have been sustained in the accident.  Mr Justice Twomey noted that "the post-accident medical records are not only relevant but invariably crucial to every personal injuries claim".   
It strikes the writer that it would be a very rare occasion where a party could successfully argue that such notes and records are not relevant to the case.  Indeed, the Plaintiff in this case did not argue that the records were irrelevant.
 

In this case the Plaintiff made two arguments that the disclosure was unnecessary:
 

The Court rejected these arguments as it placed great emphasis on the fact that it was the Plaintiff's choice what medical experts they engaged and therefore and it may be that any expert may not have the full medical picture.  Furthermore, it noted that 97% of personal injury cases settled as such the Defendant may not get the opportunity to cross examine.

The Court was taken with the view that it was a role of discovery to "keep the parties honest" in litigation and the provision of notes and records would have that effect. 

The Time Period for Discovery

However, the Court accepted that there needed to be a proportionate approach taken to the provision of records.  The rule of thumb following Power v Tesco Ireland Ltd [2016] IEHC 390 was that pre accident records should be for a three year period prior unless particular circumstances suggested an alternate period. 

The court considered that a similar proportionate approach was required relating to post accident records.  On the facts of this case the request had been confined to the five months post accident which the Court considered reasonable.

Conclusion

This decision brings welcome clarity to the position regarding post accident records and cases where there is a blanket refusal to provide them.  In the writer's opinion there can be nothing more relevant than the treatment the Plaintiff received post incident and in the appropriate case an examination of this treatment is entirely necessary to ensure that causation is established and there are no inconsistencies in any allegations made.  We, also consider, the provision of these notes will save on court time and shorten the life cycle of cases as it allows both the Plaintiff and defendant to get to the core issues in the case.