The High Court proposed requiring John Ronan and Sons and four former Clean Build figures to carry out remediation at a waste site on Bohernabreena Road, Tallaght, by the end of 2012. Mr Justice Clarke apportioned responsibility among the individuals but left the final form of orders and claims for costs for further submissions.
The judgment, delivered on 4 August 2011, followed the joint hearing of proceedings brought by Ronan and South Dublin County Council under sections 57 and 58 of the Waste Management Act. Clean Build, which operated a waste recovery business at the site, went into voluntary liquidation and was later dissolved. The court said the company was no longer in a position to comply with a remediation order.
The site had formerly been used by Ronan as a skin and hide factory. Clean Build leased it in 2004 and accumulated building waste there. The court found that the waste problem required remediation, but the parties disputed who was responsible and what work was necessary.
The court preferred a revised remediation proposal prepared by Minerex Environmental Solutions. It included groundwater treatment, processing and removal of other waste, and removal of gypsum. The council’s expert accepted that the proposal would eliminate environmental pollution risks, while raising concerns about capping and the proposed timetable. The judge rejected capping as unnecessary and disproportionate on the evidence, and required the work to be completed by the end of 2012.
The court found no material breach of applicable rules by Ronan during its earlier occupation. It nevertheless said Ronan, as the current owner and occupier, was the holder of waste at the site and should procure the remediation. The proposed order would give Ronan an indemnity from the individuals for their apportioned shares.
Mr Farrell was assigned 10% of the remediation problem for the period before he left Clean Build in January 2007. Mr Mullin and Mr Redmond were jointly responsible for 85% for the following period, until the July 2008 handover. Mr O’Rua was assigned 5% after taking control. The judge found Mr O’Rua personally liable despite a statutory change to the definition of “holder” that took effect on 1 July 2008, because of his hands-on role and possession of waste. Mr Roe was found not to have had a meaningful role as a holder, recoverer or disposer of waste and was excluded from personal liability.
The judge left for further argument what should happen to €144,301 spent by Ronan and €126,730 spent by the council. The council’s recovery claim was also being pursued in separate proceedings. The precise orders in both cases and the costs of the overlapping proceedings remained undecided.