The High Court has ordered inspection and sampling at relevant locations in Roadstone’s Huntstown, Belgard and Feltrim quarries as part of a civil claim concerning alleged pyritic heave at the Drumnigh Wood Estate.
In a judgment delivered on 21 February 2019, Ms Justice Murphy directed Roadstone Ltd to identify the quarry locations from which stone was extracted and delivered to the development. The order concerns inspection and sampling to obtain evidence; the court did not decide whether any defendant was liable for damage to houses.
Ballymore Residential Ltd and Crosswinds Cottage Ltd had renewed their application under Order 50, rule 4 of the Rules of the Superior Courts. The court found inspection necessary in light of the defence filed by the first and second defendants, which put the plaintiffs to proof on matters including whether Roadstone supplied stone to the estate, whether it was used as subfloor infill, whether it contained reactive framboidal pyrite, and whether defects caused damage.
The court said Roadstone had extraction plans, blast records and delivery dockets that could identify the relevant locations. It noted that the blast records numbered about 800. A previous inspection of Murphy Concrete’s Hollywood quarry had not been sufficient to identify precisely whether Roadstone material was present in the allegedly affected houses.
Roadstone opposed inspection before discovery, arguing that the proposed process could be premature, too broad or repeated later. The court rejected those objections in this application, concluding that Roadstone could identify the relevant areas and that a focused, single inspection would limit interference with its property. The plaintiffs had undertaken not to seek further inspections if Roadstone identified the locations.
The judgment also addressed a separate attempt to obtain blast records through a notice to produce. The court considered that route misconceived because the records had not been identified in pleadings or discovery documents. A separate motion seeking discovery in aid of inspection had been adjourned by consent pending this decision; the judgment does not record its later disposition.
The court expected the parties’ experts to agree an inspection and sampling protocol and the level of insurance cover to protect Roadstone’s interests. The order was made to help the plaintiffs progress their claim and identify the source of stone associated with each affected house. The judgment made no finding that the stone was defective or that any party caused the alleged damage.