A man who had sued for damages claiming he would be chronically injured for the rest of his life after a collision at a roundabout had his action thrown out by a High Court judge on Friday.
Mr Justice Bernard Barton said Victor Olaru's claim was "grossly exaggerated" and he found the collision was "a deliberate event" most likely the result of an arrangement between Mr Olaru and another individual.
The 41 year old father of four had sued the alleged driver of the other vehicle involved and the Motor Insurers Bureau of Ireland (MIBI).
The alleged driver of the other car was untraced and the case proceeded against the MIBI only.
Dismissing the case Mr Justice Barton said Mr Olaru gave evidence which he knew to be false or misleading in a material respect and that in the particular circumstances of the case the prosecution of the claim amounted to an abuse of the judicial process.
The court found as a matter of probability Mr Olaru’s jeep was stationery at the time of the collision and the damage to his jeep was inconsistent with his evidence that he was travelling at 20 to 30 kmh when the crash occurred.
The judge found Mr Olaru to be “an entirely unreliable witness who gave contradictory, inconsistent, unbelievable and untruthful evidence, notwithstanding his numerous assertions to the contrary.”
Who will now pay the costs of the action which lasted several days will be decided in January.
Mr Justice Barton was told that Mr Olaru - a native of Moldova and with an address in Clonsilla, Dublin 15 - was presently in Moldova but would return in January for the costs application by the MIBI.
Mr Olaru who had represented himself had claimed he suffered damage to his body, including back injuries in the collision between his jeep and another jeep on April 9th 2009 in Clonee, Co Meath.
Mr Justice Barton said on the face of it this was a straightforward road traffic collision at a roundabout where the other driver fled the scene.
But the judge said the circumstances were anything but straightforward. Mr Olaru he said alleged the accident was “an attempted murder.” And the MIBI said it was “a set up”.
There were circumstances in the case the judge said which “border on the bizarre.”
Mr Olaru initially maintained he did not know the identity of the other driver but it subsequently transpired he had business dealings with the other alleged driver a year before. He also had details of the other drivers motor insurance. A few days after the accident the judge said Mr Olaru reported the accident to the other man’s insurer and named him as the other driver.
Mr Olaru said he was knocked unconscious in the crash, but yet he could give the name of the other alleged driver and give the insurance company details a few days later.
Mr Justice Barton said he accepted the garda evidence in the case and also the medical notes which referred to a slight head injury but there was no mention of loss of consciousness.
The most likely explanation of Mr Olaru’s possession of and reporting of the other man’s insurance details and naming him as the driver of the other jeep was that the details had been given to Mr Olaru “as part of an arrangement the purpose of which was to make a claim for compensation,” the judge said.