The High Court has ordered Murphy Concrete (Manufacturing) Ltd. to provide particulars of its settlement with plaintiffs in pyrite damage proceedings, after Ballymore Residential Ltd. and Cross Winds Cottage Ltd. said they could not assess the contribution or indemnity claim against them without knowing what Murphy Concrete was seeking.
Mr Justice Robert Eagar delivered judgment on 23 November 2020 on a motion by Ballymore and Cross Winds, third parties in proceedings brought by Emmett McLoughlin and Mary Flannery. The motion concerned the third party proceedings in the McLoughlin case; the judge said the judgment would also cover issues in the Flannery case.
The underlying claims concerned alleged damage to homes from pyrite in stone infill used in construction at Drumnigh Wood Estate. The homeowners’ claims against Murphy Concrete had been settled and struck out by consent. Murphy Concrete maintained its third party claims against Ballymore and Cross Winds for an indemnity or contribution, but said it could not disclose settlement details because the agreement was confidential and covered disputes across several developments.
Ballymore and Cross Winds sought particulars including whether Murphy Concrete had paid or would pay the plaintiff, the amounts involved, and the basis for seeking an indemnity or contribution. They argued that the settlement left them unable to identify the amount or case they had to meet. Murphy Concrete submitted that the broader issues of responsibility among the parties should be addressed in related proceedings before the court, and that details might be sought later through discovery.
The judge declined to adjourn the motion pending the related homeowner and stone supplier proceedings. He accepted that confidentiality supports mediation, but concluded that it did not answer the need for Murphy Concrete to explain the claim it was pursuing. He also noted that the settlement covered multiple developments and that the earlier order striking out the homeowners’ claims did not impose confidentiality as a condition.
Applying the rules on particulars, the court found the litigation complex and said proper particulars could define the issues and limit the burden and expense of discovery. It granted the relief sought under paragraphs 1 and 2 of the motion, directing Murphy Concrete to provide full and proper particulars within four weeks of perfection of the order. The judgment did not decide whether Ballymore or Cross Winds owed an indemnity or contribution, nor did it disclose the settlement terms or amount.
The court directed that the case be listed on 18 December 2020 for the formal order, further case management and consideration of costs. It said Murphy Concrete could seek details of the basis on which the plaintiffs did not proceed against Ballymore and Cross Winds, but must apply by notice of motion. Applications by Roadstone, CRH and William Miley were also to be made by notice of motion.