The High Court has directed Dublin City Council to make discovery of records about roadworks near the site of a cyclist’s 2014 crash, limiting the period covered to five years before the accident.
In a judgment delivered on 17 January 2023, Ms Justice Niamh Hyland considered a discovery motion in a personal injuries action brought by Patrick Sheeran against the council. The judgment says the accident happened on Pearse Street, Dublin 2, on 13 June 2014. Sheeran alleges that his bicycle struck a defect in the road surface, throwing him from the bike and causing serious injuries. Those claims have not been determined in this discovery ruling.
The council’s 2017 defence denies misfeasance and says it will rely on non-feasance. It also pleads that any road defect arose through normal wear and tear over a period of years.
The council had previously provided an affidavit of discovery listing two documents relating to works described as “core holes” on Pearse Street in August and September 2013. The plaintiff’s solicitors later sought confirmation that no other records existed and identified categories of documents they expected might be held, including work plans, risk assessments and records showing where core holes were taken. The judgment records that the council did not reply to that request. No affidavit responding to the 2021 motion was filed for the council.
The motion sought records relating to works on the relevant section of Pearse Street for 80 years before the accident. Justice Hyland found that discovery was warranted because whether the council had carried out works at the location, and what those works involved, would be relevant to the distinction between misfeasance and non-feasance and to liability.
She considered the requested document description appropriate but reduced the period to five years before the accident, noting that the 80-year period was excessive and that records already disclosed showed work in 2013. She also found “the relevant section of Pearse Street” too vague because the papers did not identify the precise accident location. The parties were required to provide the Registrar with an agreed precise description of the area and the name of the discovery deponent by close of business on 23 January 2023.
The judgment says that once those details were provided, the court would make the discovery order in specified terms. Discovery was to be made within six weeks of the order. The ruling did not determine liability or the underlying injury claim.