Mr. John Gleeson:

Yes. Proceedings were made against naming the HSE and another entity, which happened to be a laboratory. We were informed of that and the State Claims Agency asked if the contract indemnified the HSE in respect of the reading of a test with regard to a co-defendant. We went to work on that and found that it does. The plaintiff's legal team was asked if it would drop the case and make it just against the co-defendant, and they said "No". The legal team said it had an issue around the delay in informing the affected woman. That element of the case was struck out; it was not that we did not tell the patient, it was noted that the information was late and took a long time. That was the basis. After that, any engagement largely centred on legal teams and we were asked if a settlement was proposed during mediation prior to a court appearance. The State Claims Agency advised that we should be supportive of any such moves. We took the agency's advice and said "Yes".