Cyclist sues in High Court after dog ran out on him during training ride

Posted on: March 12th, 2018

The cyclist said the dog ran out on him from a driveway without warning. He claimed the dog owners were negligent and should have secured their garden to keep the dog in. A series of injuries sustained by the cyclist was also outlined in court.


Cyclist sues in High Court after dog ran out on him


A cyclist who crashed when a dog ran out on him while he was training has settled his compensation action for the injuries he sustained.

Eamonn Reilly said he could no longer exercise because of the pain he suffered in his hands when the dog caused him to crash.

“My hands are completely crippled with constant pain,” he said of the pain he suffered while training with a friend five years ago.

“It drives you around the bend because you can’t do the things you want to do.”

Mr Justice Kevin Cross, at the High Court, was told the white collie dog was owned by Michael and Philip Lynch of Johnstown, Dunany, Togher, Dunleer, Co Louth.

Mr Reilly sued them in the High Court over the incident on May 19th, 2013, outside the Lynch home.

Cyclist Eamonn Reilly said the dog ran out of from the driveway of the house and he collided with it. He was thrown off the bike and lost consciousness. Furthermore, he suffered cuts and bruises and a fractured left elbow.

In his action Mr Reilly said the Lynchs had failed to secure their garden so the dog could not run out onto the road.

The court was told he had suffered serious injuries to his hands and still had debilitating pain. He had also lost a lot of skin from the accident, which occurred when he was riding at about 30km per hour.

The defendants conceded liability but suggested Mr Reilly had suffered the injuries to his hands when logs fell on them in October, 2013; six months after the crash.

Mr Reilly (53), Rockfield Close, Ardee, Co Louth, said he could not long play sport, including cycling and running. He could also no longer play guitar.

However, under cross-examination he disputed any suggestion the injuries to his hands were caused by the incident with the logs.

The two parties then held discussion outside of court. And soon after Mr Justice Cross was told the case would go no further as the matter had been settled, on undisclosed terms.