The High Court awarded Hollybrook (Brighton Road) Management Company Limited €22,518.40 in damages after finding Gina Farrell breached her contract to clean the common areas of the Hollybrook apartment complex in Foxrock, Dublin.
Ms Justice Laffoy’s judgment, delivered on 5 October 2011, found that Ms Farrell was required to provide two cleaners from Monday to Friday, between 9am and 1pm. The court concluded that she did not always meet that obligation. It assessed the company’s loss at one fifth of the total monthly payments made over 31 months, from August 2003 to February 2006.
The company had claimed that Ms Farrell altered concierge logs to suggest cleaners had attended when they had not, and that it was overcharged through duplicate invoices, missed attendance and payments above the agreed contract price. Ms Farrell denied fraud, overcharging and breach of contract. During the hearing, she admitted altering the logs, describing it as a “tidying up” operation. The judge found the changes were intended to mislead anyone examining the records.
The court did not award damages for the alleged duplicate invoices. It found that the plaintiff had paid for the common-area cleaning under its contract with Ms Farrell, while DCD Builders Limited had separately paid invoices for the same work. Any loss from those duplicate payments belonged to DCD, a separate company, and the plaintiff could not recover it. The judgment noted that DCD was pursuing its own claim against Ms Farrell, but that case had not advanced beyond the summary summons stage.
The court also rejected the claim that Ms Farrell had charged more than the agreed contract price. Although a draft contract and correspondence referred to €28,800 a year, the judge concluded that the evidence showed the agreed price was €3,200 a month plus VAT. The claim for alleged overpayment was introduced during the hearing and was not pleaded.
The court declined to award pre-judgment interest or aggravated damages. It made an order for judgment in the amount of €22,518.40 against Ms Farrell. The judgment did not determine the costs of the proceedings in the order set out on its final page.