The High Court has refused Limerick City Council’s application to dismiss a claim over conditions at the Longpavement Halting Site, despite finding that the plaintiffs’ delay was inordinate and inexcusable.
Mr Justice Meenan ruled on 12 March 2021 that the balance of justice weighed against striking out the proceedings. He adjourned the application until 16 November 2021 to review progress, and also adjourned the question of costs.
The claim was brought by Cornelius Faulkner, Johanna Faulkner and six other family members, including seven plaintiffs who were minors when the case began. The judgment records that the plaintiffs’ second named member died in 2004 and that all seven minors had since reached adulthood. The proceedings had not been amended to reflect those changes.
The plaintiffs allege that the council was responsible for the halting site and provided accommodation that was grossly unfit for human habitation. The judgment records those as claims in the proceedings; it does not decide whether the site was unfit or whether the council was liable.
The case began in July 2003. The council sought dismissal on grounds of delay, pointing to the absence of witnesses and the difficulty of securing a fair trial. A number of former council employees and other potential witnesses had left their jobs, retired or died. The council also said the site had been redeveloped in 2008 and 2009.
The judge found that the plaintiffs had not credibly explained the lengthy delay. However, he also considered the council’s conduct. The council had participated in discovery and in arranging a joint site inspection in December 2017, after several potential witnesses were already unavailable. The judge found that this conduct amounted to delay and acquiescence, and had encouraged the plaintiffs to incur further expense pursuing the case.
He also noted that the council had pleaded a Statute of Limitations defence in 2012 but had not sought a preliminary trial of that issue. The only recent prejudice identified by the council was the death of an employee who had responsibility for Traveller accommodation. The plaintiffs’ solicitor said another witness was available and could access relevant council records.
The court therefore refused the dismissal relief sought, while warning that no further delay in progressing the proceedings should be allowed. Because of the circumstances arising from the Covid-19 pandemic, the judge did not set immediate steps for preparing the case for trial. The adjournment left the underlying claim unresolved.