Judgment: 2007-11-29 · Court archive

High Court awards €412,000 over damage to Jack Humphrey’s

The court accepted liability for damage caused by neighbouring construction works but rejected a claim for full demolition and reconstruction, allowing €93,000 for repairs.

The High Court · [2007] IEHC 421

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Costello Construction Limited (Respondent)
What

The court accepted liability for damage caused by neighbouring construction works but rejected a claim for full demolition and reconstruction, allowing €93,000 for repairs.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Jack Humphrey’s
  • Five Lamps
  • Numbers 1 to 4 North Strand
  • North Strand
  • Dublin
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 30 September 2006

    Mr Justice T. C. Smyth delivered judgment on 29 November 2007. The case concerned construction works on numbers 1 to 4 North Strand and damage to the adjoining premises, sometimes referred to as numbers 5 and 6 North Strand. The judgment says cracks appeared during excavation and building work. Parts of the premises were closed, and the business suffered loss of custom and income. The entire premises closed on or about 30 September 2006.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court awarded €412,000 to the plaintiffs in a dispute over damage to Jack Humphrey’s pub at the Five Lamps in Dublin. Costello Construction Limited had conceded liability for damage caused by building works on its adjoining property. The court rejected the plaintiffs’ claim for full demolition and reconstruction, instead allowing €93,000 for repairs.

The High Court awarded €412,000 to the plaintiffs in a dispute over damage to Jack Humphrey’s pub at the Five Lamps in Dublin. Costello Construction Limited had conceded liability for damage caused by building works on its adjoining property. The court rejected the plaintiffs’ claim for full demolition and reconstruction, instead allowing €93,000 for repairs.

Mr Justice T. C. Smyth delivered judgment on 29 November 2007. The case concerned construction works on numbers 1 to 4 North Strand and damage to the adjoining premises, sometimes referred to as numbers 5 and 6 North Strand. The judgment says cracks appeared during excavation and building work. Parts of the premises were closed, and the business suffered loss of custom and income. The entire premises closed on or about 30 September 2006.

The central dispute was how to assess the building damage: by the cost of reinstatement or by repair costs and any diminution in value. The plaintiffs relied on engineer Mr Molloy’s view that the gable wall needed to be taken down and rebuilt, requiring demolition and reconstruction of the entire premises. That proposal was costed at €1.8 million. The court considered existing planning permission for a new building, including a public house and 11 apartments, and found no warrant for the full restoration proposed by Mr Molloy.

The court also considered engineer Mr Tennyson’s repair estimate of €48,000, including fees and supervision, but regarded it as too low. It added €45,000, bringing the repair allowance to €93,000. The judgment separately allowed €127,000 for lost profits and €67,000 for planning application costs. It also allowed €125,000 for the period required to carry out repairs while the plaintiffs were out of the premises. These sums made up the total award of €412,000.

The court declined to award interest. It was not satisfied that the claimed interest related solely to the events at Jack Humphrey’s; the judgment noted other matters, including other premises sold at a loss, that were not broken down in the bank’s calculations. The judgment’s final award was €412,000.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review