A Dublin woman, who claimed she had screamed in pain when a wax strip was “suddenly and ferociously” pulled along her right eyebrow by a beauty therapist, has lost a €60,000 damages claim against the salon owners.
Judge James McCourt said Nikita Kelly was just 17 when the alleged incident happened seven years ago and, in dismissing her case, added that she had not divulged information about a skin disorder which had been revealed in medical reports before the court.
“People have to work with people and professionals cannot be expected to divine information that should be freely forthcoming from a patient,” Judge McCourt said.
Ms Kelly, who will be 25 on Tuesday, told the court that after having her eyebrows waxed at AP Fashion Nails beauty salon in Finglas, Dublin 11, parts of her right eyebrow, nose and forehead had become red and skin had peeled.
When cross-examined by barrister Helen McCarthy, counsel for Amie Pike and Thomas Heary, the owners of AP Fashion Nails, Ms Kelly conceded that she had obtained prescriptions from her doctor for the treatment of facial skin problems but had not used any of the medication.
Ms McCarthy, who appeared with Kerry Lyons of Ennis Solicitors for the beauty salon and its insurer Aviva, told the court it was clear from medical records that Ms Kelly as a teenager had been prescribed medication for acne and dry skin disorders.
“I put it to you that you haven’t been very truthful here today,” Ms McCarthy told Ms Kelly.
Salon co-owner Amie Pike told Judge McCourt that Ms Kelly had attended the salon for the eyebrow reshaping procedure with a friend who had afterwards been treated, without difficulty, from the same jug of hot wax that had always been maintained at an appropriate temperature.
Judge McCourt said Ms Kelly had been on medication for skin issues and may have feared that had the salon known this they would not have undertaken the work.
“Ms Kelly may not have been able to vote at the time but was old enough to know what could happen and she did suffer an unpleasant reaction. It is understandable she would be upset,” the judge said.
He dismissed Ms Kelly’s claim but made no order against her for the payment of the defendant’s costs.
