Inadequate Security Assault Claims in Ireland: How to Prove the Venue Failed You

Summary: A premises occupier in Ireland who fails to provide reasonable security can be held liable when that failure leads to a foreseeable assault. The claim proceeds in general negligence, not under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995 ¹. Assault victims can pursue up to three separate compensation routes: a civil claim against the occupier or security contractor through the Injuries Resolution Board (IRB, formerly PIAB) ², the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal, and court-ordered restitution in criminal proceedings. Ireland only. This page does not apply to Northern Ireland or the rest of the UK, where different legislation, limitation periods, and processes apply.

For anyone injured by an assault in a pub, nightclub, hotel, shopping centre, apartment building, or at an event in Ireland where security was absent, understaffed, or negligent.

This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is different and outcomes vary. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.

Contents

Legal basis: General negligence (duty, breach, causation, damage). Not the OLA 1995. Civil Liability Act 1961

Time limit: Two years from the date of the assault (or date of knowledge). Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004

Occupier notice: Notify the premises occupier in writing within one month. CLCA 2004, s.8

Security licensing: Door supervisors must hold a PSA licence. Operating without one is a criminal offence. Private Security Authority

Quick answers

Can I sue the venue? Yes, if the occupier failed to provide reasonable security and the assault was foreseeable.

Is this an OLA claim? No. Third-party assault is a general negligence claim, not an Occupiers' Liability Act claim.

How long do I have? Two years from the date of the assault for a civil claim. Three months for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal.

What do I do first? Report to Gardai. Get medical attention. Request CCTV preservation within 48 hours.

What is an inadequate security assault claim?

An inadequate security assault claim arises when a premises occupier's failure to provide reasonable security measures causes or contributes to a foreseeable assault on a visitor in Ireland. The occupier did not commit the assault. The claim targets the occupier's negligence in allowing the conditions that made the assault possible or likely.

Typical scenarios include a pub or nightclub with too few door staff to manage a late-night crowd, a hotel with broken access controls on guest floors, a shopping centre car park with no lighting and no security patrols, and a music festival with no crowd-management plan. According to the IRB's published research (January 2025), assault-related public liability claims against businesses rose by 10% year on year in both 2023 and 2024. The most common locations were cafes, hotels, and restaurants, and the claims were typically directed against security staff or involved allegations of overcrowding or inadequate security ³.

The Security Gap Test measures this gap: the difference between the security the occupier actually provided and what a reasonable occupier would have provided, given the venue type, hours, alcohol service, capacity, and known risks.

Why the claim targets the venue, not the attacker

The difference between assessment and acceptance often comes down to who has insurance. An individual assailant is usually uninsured and may have no assets worth pursuing. The venue, by contrast, carries public liability insurance specifically designed to cover injuries that occur on its premises. When a solicitor identifies that the venue failed to provide reasonable security, the claim runs against the venue's insurer, not against the person who threw the punch. This is the practical reason why establishing the occupier's negligence matters more than identifying the attacker.

Why this is not an Occupiers' Liability Act claim

An assault by a third party is not a danger arising from the "state of the premises" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1995 ¹. The OLA covers physical defects: a broken step, a wet floor, a collapsing ceiling. An assault by another customer, or by a bouncer using excessive force, falls outside this statutory framework.

Many claimants don't realise that the legal test for proving an inadequate security claim is different from a standard public liability claim. Under general negligence, the claimant must prove that the occupier (a) owed a duty of care, (b) breached that duty by failing to take reasonable steps to prevent a foreseeable assault, (c) the breach caused or contributed to the assault, and (d) the claimant suffered injury as a result. The burden falls on the claimant to establish foreseeability and breach, which makes evidence gathering critical from the first hours after the incident.

The Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023 (Act No. 18 of 2023, effective 31 July 2023) amended the OLA 1995 and introduced a five-factor test for determining breach of duty ⁴. While this test applies directly to OLA claims, courts may reference these factors as guidance when assessing what constitutes "reasonable care" in general negligence cases involving premises.

Who can be held liable for an assault caused by poor security?

The occupier, the security contractor, or both can be held liable as concurrent wrongdoers under the Civil Liability Act 1961 (Act No. 41 of 1961). The defendants in an inadequate security claim depend on who controlled the premises and who provided the security.

Potential defendants in an inadequate security assault claim

Defendant	Basis of liability	Common examples
Venue occupier	Direct negligence: failed to provide adequate security for the venue type and known risks	Pub owner, hotel operator, shopping centre management company, event organiser
Security contractor	Vicarious liability for acts of its employees during the course of employment	Contracted security firm whose bouncer used excessive force
Both	Concurrent wrongdoers: the occupier hired an inadequate or unlicensed security firm, and the security firm's employee committed the assault	Nightclub owner who engaged unlicensed door staff through a non-PSA-licensed contractor

The Supreme Court confirmed in Hickey v McGowan [2023] IESC that the "close connection" test governs vicarious liability in Ireland. If the wrongful act was closely connected to the duties the employee was hired to perform, the employer is vicariously liable. For security staff, the use of force is closely connected to their assigned duty of maintaining order. This creates a direct path from a bouncer's excessive force to the employer's liability ⁵.

Where both the occupier and the security contractor are liable as concurrent wrongdoers, the claimant benefits from a practical advantage under Irish law. The claimant can recover the full amount of compensation from either defendant. The defendants then resolve contribution between themselves under Part III of the Civil Liability Act 1961. For claimants, this means that if one defendant's insurer is slow to pay or disputes liability, the other defendant remains fully liable for the entire award.

What makes an assault foreseeable?

Foreseeability is the central legal battleground in an inadequate security claim. Courts ask whether the occupier knew or should have known that an assault was a reasonably foreseeable risk, and whether the occupier failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it.

Irish courts assess foreseeability by examining a specific set of factors. Prior incidents on the premises carry heavy weight: previous assaults, complaints about aggressive behaviour, Garda call-outs, and internal incident reports all establish a documented pattern. The nature of the venue and activity also matters. A late-night licensed premises serving alcohol inherently carries a higher risk of aggressive behaviour than a daytime retail premises. Alcohol service practices are directly relevant. Under the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003, it is an offence to supply alcohol to a drunken person ⁶. Continued service to visibly intoxicated patrons who then assault others strengthens the foreseeability argument.

Other factors include overcrowding beyond safe capacity, the time of day (late-night hours carry higher risk), the adequacy of existing security (number of door staff relative to capacity, CCTV coverage, lighting levels, ejection protocols), and the area crime profile of the surrounding neighbourhood.

The Security Gap Test draws on all of these factors. The wider the gap between the security that was in place and what a reasonable occupier would have provided, the stronger the case for breach of duty.

Answer each question to assess the foreseeability indicators in your situation. This is general guidance only, not legal advice.

The insurer's primary defence: novus actus interveniens

Defendants and their insurers routinely argue that a third-party assault is a novus actus interveniens (a new intervening act) that breaks the chain of causation between the occupier's negligence and the claimant's injuries. The argument goes: the criminal act of the assailant was an independent, unforeseeable event, so the occupier cannot be liable for it. In McCarthy v Kavanagh (t/a Tekken Security) [2021], the Supreme Court rejected this defence. The court held that where the violent act was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's own negligence, the criminal act of the third party does not break the chain of causation ¹⁶. For claimants, this means that establishing foreseeability (through the factors above) is also the key to defeating the novus actus defence.

What does "reasonable security" look like for each venue type?

Security Gap Test: what a reasonable occupier would typically provide, by venue type in Ireland

Venue type	Typical security measures expected	Common failures that strengthen a claim
Pub or nightclub (late licence)	PSA-licensed door staff at entry, CCTV at doors, bar areas, and exits, refusal protocols for intoxicated patrons, crowd capacity management	No door staff after midnight, serving visibly intoxicated patrons, overcrowding beyond fire safety limits, CCTV not recording
Hotel	Functioning access controls on guest floors, CCTV in common areas, adequate lighting in car parks and corridors, night porter or security presence	Broken key card systems, dark car parks with no patrols, no CCTV in corridors, no night-time security
Shopping centre	Security patrols covering car parks and common areas, working CCTV, adequate lighting, visible security presence during trading hours	Unpatrolled car parks, lighting failures reported but not repaired, CCTV covering entrances only
Apartment common areas	Working intercom and access gate, CCTV in stairwells and entrances, adequate lighting, maintained locks on communal doors	Broken intercom for months, no CCTV despite prior incidents, burned-out lighting in stairwells, unlocked communal doors
Festival or concert	Crowd-management plan, licensed event security at entry and throughout, bag checks, medical and communications infrastructure	No crowd-management plan, understaffed security, no bag checks, no communications between security zones

What does NOT count as adequate security

Having security on paper is not the same as having security that works. CCTV cameras that are installed but not recording do not constitute adequate security. Door staff who are inside the bar serving drinks rather than monitoring the entrance do not satisfy the occupier's duty. An incident report book that exists but was never completed after a prior complaint does not demonstrate a reasonable inspection system. A crowd-management plan that was drafted for a licence application but never implemented on the night does not reduce liability. Irish courts assess what the occupier actually did, not what they claim to have in place.

PSA licensing: how unlicensed security strengthens your claim

All door supervisors at licensed premises in Ireland must hold a valid licence from the Private Security Authority (PSA) under the Private Security Services Act 2004 (Act No. 12 of 2004). Under Section 37, providing security services without a PSA licence is a criminal offence. Under Section 38, employing or engaging an unlicensed security contractor is also an offence, carrying a fine of up to €3,000 or imprisonment of up to 12 months or both ⁷.

Unlicensed door staff lack the mandatory QQI Level 4 training in conflict resolution, use-of-force protocols, and patron management. The PSA maintains a publicly searchable register of licensed individuals at psa-gov.ie ⁸. Claimants can verify whether door staff were licensed before contacting a solicitor. Unlicensed security is a strong indicator of negligent hiring.

According to the Private Security Authority (November 2024) ⁸, the PSA successfully prosecuted unlicensed door supervisor contractors in Laois and Wexford, resulting in fines and costs. If a venue employed unlicensed personnel, the negligence in hiring is directly linked to the assault, making breach of duty far easier to establish.

Licensed venues in Ireland are also required to retain daily sign-in and sign-out rotas that record the full names and PSA licence numbers of every security operative on duty. These records must be kept for a minimum period. A solicitor can request these rotas through the pre-trial discovery process. If the rotas show that unlicensed individuals were working the night of the assault, the negligence case becomes very difficult for the defence to resist.

Claims involving bouncer assault and excessive force

Security staff in Ireland hold no special legal authority beyond that of an ordinary citizen. Bouncers have no statutory right to use physical force except in strict self-defence or to prevent the commission of a crime, and any force used must be proportionate to the threat.

The civil action against a bouncer's employer typically argues that the security employee did not have adequate training or that the training was not followed, rendering the employer negligent. In the High Court case of Hackett v Calla Associates Ltd., the plaintiff suffered a permanent facial scar following an interaction with security staff. The court found that the security personnel used more force than was reasonably necessary. It also found that the plaintiff had engaged in aggressive behaviour that provoked the confrontation. The court applied a 50% reduction in damages for contributory negligence, reducing the gross award from €100,000 to €50,000 ⁹.

Even where the bouncer's use of force was triggered by the claimant's behaviour, the proportionality of the response is still assessed independently. A disproportionate reaction by security staff remains actionable, but contributory negligence under Section 34 of the Civil Liability Act 1961 will reduce the award.

The three compensation routes after an assault

An assault victim in Ireland can pursue up to three separate compensation pathways, known collectively as the Three-Pathway Framework. The choice depends on whether the occupier or security firm was negligent, whether the assailant was identified, and whether criminal proceedings follow.

Route 1: Civil claim against the occupier or security firm (via IRB)

Where the occupier or security contractor was negligent, the claim proceeds through the Injuries Resolution Board (IRB) ² before court. Unlike the UK, where there is no equivalent mandatory pre-court assessment body, all personal injury claims in Ireland (except medical negligence) must be submitted to the IRB before issuing court proceedings. The respondent is the occupier, not the assailant. This route compensates both general damages (pain, suffering, loss of quality of life) and special damages (medical costs, lost earnings, travel expenses). The two-year limitation period applies.

Route 2: Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal (CICT)

Where no negligent occupier can be identified, or the assault occurred in a purely public space, the victim may apply to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal (CICT) ¹⁰. Applications must be filed within three months (with limited discretion for late applications up to two years). The assault must be reported to An Garda Siochana.

Route 3: Court-ordered compensation in criminal proceedings

If the assailant is convicted, the sentencing court may order the offender to pay compensation to the victim. This is separate from both the civil claim and the CICT application. A victim can pursue all three routes at the same time, though double recovery is not permitted.

The Three-Pathway Framework: comparing the civil claim route (IRB) with the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal

Feature	Civil claim (IRB route)	CICT
Defendant / respondent	Premises occupier, security contractor, or both	The State (for crimes with no negligent occupier)
Time limit	Two years from date of assault or date of knowledge	Three months (late applications up to two years in exceptional cases)
Compensation scope	General damages and special damages	Previously out-of-pocket expenses only. Post-CJEU ruling (Oct 2025): must now include pain and suffering
Prerequisites	Medical evidence. Notify occupier within one month	Garda report. Full cooperation with Garda investigation

What evidence proves inadequate security in Ireland?

CCTV footage is typically the single most decisive piece of evidence in an inadequate security claim in Ireland. It can show the duration of a hazard, the absence of security staff, the failure to eject an aggressive patron, or the use of excessive force by a bouncer. Commercial venues in Ireland typically overwrite CCTV footage on loops of 7 to 30 days.

The enforcement mechanism behind this right is often overlooked. Once a Subject Access Request is submitted, the venue has one calendar month to respond. If the venue ignores or refuses the request, the claimant can file a complaint with the Data Protection Commission ¹². In practice, the strongest lever is not the DPC complaint itself but the legal consequence: if a venue was put on notice and then allowed CCTV to be overwritten, the court may presume that the lost footage would have supported the claimant's version of events.

Beyond CCTV, effective evidence includes: Garda incident reports and PULSE records (report the assault immediately), the venue's internal accident/incident report book, PSA licence checks for door staff via the public register at psa-gov.ie, witness statements from patrons, staff, or bystanders, medical records from the day of the assault, the security company's contract (staffing ratios, training records, intervention protocols), and fire safety and capacity records showing the venue exceeded its safe capacity.

Same-day medical attendance establishes legal causation. Any gap between the assault and the first medical visit gives the defence an argument that the injuries were sustained after leaving the venue.

Compensation: what can be claimed?

Awards for assault injuries in Ireland follow the Judicial Council's Personal Injuries Guidelines (2021), which replaced the Book of Quantum. All figures below are ranges from the Guidelines and vary with each case ¹³.

Personal Injuries Guidelines ranges for common assault injuries (general damages only). Every case is assessed on its own facts. These are indicative ranges, not predictions.

Injury type	Severity	Guidelines range
PTSD / psychological injury	Moderate (good prognosis)	€10,000 to €35,000
PTSD / psychological injury	Severe (permanent effects on daily life)	€40,000 to €80,000
Facial scarring	Varies by visibility, location, permanence	€1,000 to €40,000
Nasal fracture	Undisplaced, full recovery	€500 to €3,000
Jaw fracture	Simple fracture, good recovery	€5,000 to €20,000
Leg fracture (into knee joint)	Severe, long-term impact	€55,000 to €75,000

Special damages are claimed separately and cover quantifiable financial losses: medical bills, ongoing rehabilitation, lost earnings, and travel costs. Psychological injuries now account for 14% of all IRB awards, reflecting the high incidence of PTSD, anxiety, and depression following assaults ¹⁵.

What are the time limits for an assault claim in Ireland?

The limitation period for an assault claim in Ireland is two years from the date of the assault (or from the date of knowledge of the injury, which is relevant where psychological injuries develop later). Unlike in England and Wales, where the limitation period for personal injury is three years under the Limitation Act 1980, the Irish two-year window under the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 is shorter and strictly enforced. Under Section 8 of the Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004 (Act No. 31 of 2004) ¹⁴, the claimant must notify the occupier of the premises in writing within one month of the assault. Failure to give this notice can affect costs recovery at trial.

The civil claim must be submitted to the IRB before court proceedings can begin. The respondent in an assault claim is the occupier or security firm, not the individual who committed the assault. The IRB assesses damages based on the Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021. If either party rejects the assessment, the IRB issues an authorisation to proceed to court.

Since 8 May 2024, the IRB offers a free mediation service for public liability claims, including assault claims. Both the claimant and the respondent must opt in. Where both parties agree, mediated claims resolve in an average of three months, compared with 11.2 months for a standard IRB assessment ¹⁵. This is a significantly faster path to resolution, though it requires the respondent's willingness to engage. If mediation fails, the claim proceeds to standard assessment.

For the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal, the time limit is much shorter: three months from the date of the assault. Late applications up to two years may be accepted in exceptional circumstances only.

IRB assault claims: the numbers

Assault-related public liability claims are rising against a backdrop of declining overall claim volumes. According to the Injuries Resolution Board Annual Report (2024) ¹⁵, overall public liability claim volumes fell 40% between 2019 and 2023. Assault claims bucked this trend entirely, rising 10% between 2022 and 2023 and a further 10% between 2023 and 2024 ³.

The median public liability award in 2024 was €13,660 (down 34% since 2020). The IRB's average award across all categories in the second half of 2024 was €23,877, up 4% on the previous year due to more serious injuries being assessed ¹⁵. Psychological injuries now account for 14% of all IRB awards, up from previous years. Respondent consent to IRB assessment reached 70% in 2024, and 50% of assessments are now accepted by both parties.

How have Irish courts ruled on security negligence?

How do criminal proceedings affect the civil claim?

The criminal case and the civil claim are independent proceedings in Ireland. A claimant does not need to wait for the criminal prosecution to conclude before filing a civil claim through the IRB. Under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997, assault is defined at three levels of severity: simple assault (Section 2), assault causing harm (Section 3), and assault causing serious harm (Section 4) ¹⁸.

If the assailant is convicted, that conviction is strong (though not conclusive) evidence in the civil proceedings. The IRB statistics don't capture this nuance: a conviction does not automatically prove that the venue was negligent. The civil claim must still establish that the occupier's security failures caused or contributed to the assault. Where no criminal prosecution takes place, or the prosecution fails, the civil claim can still succeed on the balance of probabilities (a lower standard of proof than the criminal "beyond reasonable doubt").

Mistakes that weaken assault claims in Ireland

Posting about the incident on social media before getting legal advice is the most common error Irish claimants make. Defence solicitors routinely search the claimant's public social media profiles. Posts, photos, or check-ins that contradict the claimed injuries or timeline can be used to reduce or defeat the claim.

Reporting to Gardai but not to the venue. Many victims report the assault to An Garda Siochana but forget to ensure it is logged in the venue's own incident report book. Both records serve different purposes. The Garda report supports the criminal track and the CICT application. The venue's internal log confirms that the occupier was put on notice and triggers the one-month notification requirement under Section 8.

Waiting more than 48 hours to request CCTV. Once footage is overwritten, the strongest evidence is gone. Even a same-day email to the venue manager counts as a preservation request.

Assuming a closed venue means no claim. The public liability insurance policy that was in force on the date of the assault survives the closure of the business. The claim runs against the insurer, not the trading entity. If you were assaulted in a venue that has since closed, the claim may still be viable.

Steps to take after an assault on premises in Ireland

1. Get safe and call the Gardai. Report the assault to An Garda Siochana immediately. Keep the station name, reporting officer, and any PULSE reference number.

2. Seek medical attention on the same day. Attend A&E or your GP immediately. Same-day medical records establish legal causation. Delayed attendance gives the defence an opening to dispute causation.

3. Request CCTV preservation within 48 hours. Ask the venue in writing (email or letter) to preserve all CCTV footage covering the assault, the hour before it, and the hour after. Keep a copy of your request.

4. Report the incident to venue management. Ensure the assault is recorded in the venue's internal incident report book. Ask for a copy or photograph the entry.

5. Collect witness details. Names, phone numbers, and brief statements from anyone who saw the assault or the conditions leading to it.

6. Photograph your injuries and the scene. Time-stamped photos of the venue, the hazard (poor lighting, overcrowding, absent security), and your injuries carry strong weight.

7. Check PSA licensing. Verify whether the door staff held valid PSA licences by checking the public register at psa-gov.ie.

8. Contact a solicitor. A solicitor can issue the one-month occupier notification, pursue CCTV through a formal Subject Access Request, file the IRB application within the two-year limitation period, and advise on which of the Three-Pathway Framework routes applies to your circumstances.

What to consider next

What if the assault happened just outside the venue entrance? The occupier's duty of care can extend beyond the physical boundary of the premises. If the venue's security staff ejected a patron into a known danger (for example, refusing readmission when they knew the patron faced a threat outside), liability can attach. In McCarthy v Kavanagh [2021], the Supreme Court found liability in exactly this situation ¹⁶. The key question is whether the security staff's actions foreseeably exposed the claimant to harm.

What if I was intoxicated at the time of the assault? Being drunk does not defeat the claim. The occupier's duty to provide adequate security exists independently of the claimant's level of intoxication. Contributory negligence under Section 34 of the Civil Liability Act 1961 will reduce the award if the claimant's own behaviour contributed to the incident, but it will not extinguish the claim entirely. The reduction depends on the degree of contribution.

Can I claim for psychological injury after an assault? Yes. PTSD, anxiety, and depression following an assault are compensable under the Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021. A psychiatric report from a consultant psychiatrist is typically required. See our guide to psychological injury claims.

What if the assault happened at a concert or festival? The event organiser, the venue owner, and the contracted security firm may all share liability as concurrent wrongdoers. Crowd-management failures and understaffing at events are assessed using the same Security Gap Test factors. See event and venue accident claims (coming soon).

What if my injuries appeared days or weeks after the assault? The two-year limitation period runs from the "date of knowledge" of the injury, not the date of the assault, where injuries develop later. Concussion symptoms, PTSD, and soft tissue injuries can present days or weeks after the incident. Seek medical attention as soon as symptoms appear and keep a record of the onset.

References

1. Occupiers' Liability Act 1995, irishstatutebook.ie: Full text
2. Injuries Resolution Board, citizensinformation.ie: IRB overview
3. IRB public liability research, reported Irish Times (Jan 2025): Article
4. Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023: Law Society Gazette (July 2023); Full text
5. Vicarious liability and the "close connection" test: Hickey v McGowan [2023] IESC. Courts Service
6. Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003, citizensinformation.ie
7. Private Security Services Act 2004, irishstatutebook.ie: Full text
8. PSA prosecution of unlicensed contractors, psa-gov.ie: 2024 enforcement
9. Hackett v Calla Associates Ltd., High Court of Ireland. Courts Service
10. Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, gov.ie: CICT overview
11. CJEU ruling LD v CICT (Case C-284/24), irishlegal.com (Oct 2025): Analysis
12. Data Protection Commission, CCTV guidance: dataprotection.ie
13. Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021, judicialcouncil.ie: Guidelines Committee
14. Civil Liability and Courts Act 2004, s.8, irishstatutebook.ie: Section 8
15. IRB Award Values Report H2 2024, injuries.ie: Press release
16. McCarthy v Kavanagh (t/a Tekken Security) [2021], Supreme Court of Ireland. Courts Service
17. O'Neill v Dunnes Stores [2010] IESC 380. Courts Service
18. Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997, irishstatutebook.ie: Full text

Related guides on this topic: Public liability claims · Pub and nightclub accidents · Proving a public liability claim · CCTV and accident evidence · Psychological injury claims · IRB claims process · Compensation guide · Time limits

Common questions about inadequate security assault claims

Can I sue a pub or nightclub if I was assaulted by another customer?

Yes, if the venue failed to provide reasonable security and the assault was foreseeable. The claim targets the occupier's negligence, not the individual assailant. A venue with a history of violent incidents, overcrowding, or insufficient door staff faces a stronger foreseeability argument.

Why it matters: Individual assailants are often uninsured and may have no assets. The venue's public liability insurance is typically the source of compensation.

Next step: Pub and nightclub accident claims

Is an assault claim a public liability claim or something different?

An assault claim caused by inadequate security is a general negligence claim, not a standard Occupiers' Liability Act claim. The OLA 1995 covers dangers due to the physical state of the premises. Third-party assault falls outside this, though the claim still comes within the broad category of public liability because it arises on premises open to visitors.

Next step: What is a public liability claim?

Do bouncers need a licence in Ireland?

Yes. All door supervisors at licensed premises must hold a valid PSA licence under the Private Security Services Act 2004. Operating without one is a criminal offence. Employing an unlicensed security contractor is also an offence. Check licences on the PSA public register at psa-gov.ie.

Why it matters: Unlicensed door staff lack mandatory training in conflict resolution and proportionate use of force. Proving unlicensed security makes breach of duty far easier to establish.

How long do I have to make a claim after an assault?

Two years from the date of the assault (or date of knowledge for injuries that develop later) for a civil claim through the IRB. Three months for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal, with limited discretion for late applications up to two years.

Next step: Time limits for public liability claims

What compensation can I get for an assault in Ireland?

Awards follow the Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021 and depend on the severity of injuries. Moderate PTSD ranges from €10,000 to €35,000. Facial scarring ranges from €1,000 to €40,000. Severe fractures can reach €55,000 to €75,000. Special damages cover medical costs, lost earnings, and expenses. Every case is different and outcomes vary.

Next step: Public liability compensation

Can I claim if I was partly to blame for the altercation?

Yes, but the award will be reduced. Under Section 34 of the Civil Liability Act 1961, courts apply contributory negligence where the claimant provoked or escalated the confrontation. In Hackett v Calla Associates, the court applied a 50% reduction. The claim is not extinguished by contributory negligence, but the reduction can be significant.

What is the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal?

The CICT is a state-funded scheme that compensates victims of violent crime in Ireland. Following the October 2025 CJEU ruling in LD v CICT (Case C-284/24), the scheme must now include compensation for pain and suffering, not just out-of-pocket expenses. The Department of Justice is reviewing implementation. Applications must be filed within three months of the assault.

How quickly should I request CCTV after an assault?

Within 48 hours. Most venues overwrite CCTV on loops of 7 to 30 days. A formal preservation request puts the venue on notice. If they destroy footage after receiving your request, courts can draw adverse inferences against them. You also have the right to a Subject Access Request under GDPR for footage containing your image.

Next step: CCTV and accident evidence

Can I claim against a hotel if I was assaulted in the car park or corridor?

Yes, if the hotel failed to maintain reasonable security in common areas, such as functioning CCTV, adequate lighting, working access controls on guest floors, and security patrols. Hotels that serve alcohol late at night carry heightened foreseeability obligations.

Next step: Hotel accident claims

Does the assault need to be reported to the Gardai?

Reporting to An Garda Siochana is not strictly required for a civil claim against the occupier, but it is strongly recommended. A Garda report provides an independent record of the event. Reporting is required if you intend to apply to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Tribunal.

Can I still claim if the venue has closed down?

Yes. The public liability insurance policy that was in force on the date of the assault survives the closure of the business. The claim runs against the insurer, not the trading entity. A solicitor can trace the insurer that covered the venue on the date of the incident through standard industry channels.

Why it matters: Many assault victims assume a closed venue means no claim. It does not. The insurance obligation exists independently of whether the business is still trading.

This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is different and outcomes vary. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.