HSE liable for teenager burning house

The HSE has been held liable in damages for the burning down of a Westmeath house next door to where it had "negligently" placed a vulnerable teenager known to them for her reckless behaviour.

Mr Justice Gerard Hogan yesterday decided in a reserved High Court judgment that Teresa Ennis, whose home at 11 Percy Cottages, Magazine Rd, Athlone, was gutted by fire, was entitled to recover damages against the HSE.

Judge Hogan said that, in 2005, Jarleth Egan, a NUI Galway student, had bought and spent his summer renovating No 10 Percy Cottages as a rental investment and had leased it to Ms A, who had been an in-care resident in the HSE’s nearby Shannon Retreat at No 6 Percy Cottages.

After No 10 had been damaged, he terminated the lease once it had become clear Ms A was unable or unwilling to look after the property.

The judge said a fire had started in No 10 and spread to No 11 after Ms A had vacated the house but had unlawfully re-entered it with a number of other youths who had held a party in it, at which they had been drinking very heavily and had taken illegal substances.

They had left the house after discovering a fire had started upstairs.

Judge Hogan said Ms A had been in care from the age of two and had just reached her 18th birthday. After having been put out of No 10, she had refused to return to the HSE’s Shannon Retreat.

She had wanted to go out with a particular man and, despite having been warned he was a convicted rapist had considered it OK to do so. She had been missing for a short time during which there had been a brief unsuccessful garda search for her. Then it had been discovered No 10 was on fire and that Ms A had been involved in the party at which it had started.

Judge Hogan said Ms A was an acutely vulnerable young woman who failed to co-operate with various therapies and had engaged in substance misuse. She had a troubled history and started associating with a rough crowd, showing no regard for discipline.

She had continued drinking heavily and resorted to drug-taking, becoming reckless, with no sense of personal responsibility.

The judge said the general principle was that one party was not liable for the actions of a third party, save where a duty of care had been found to exist by reason of special circumstances. There was a special relationship between the HSE and Ms A such as had given rise to a duty of care,” he said. The HSE had considered Ms A suitable for independent living when she patently was not.

Despite evidence of the very best endeavours of social workers he was driven to the conclusion that there was negligence on the part of the HSE in having reached this conclusion and in failing to tell Mr Egan of her background and propensities.

Ms Ennis had lost her house and had been living in rented accommodation ever since. She could justly say that none of this would have come about but for the actions of the HSE.