Judgment: 2017-10-04 · Court archive

Court of Appeal orders new damages hearing over construction workers’ accommodation

The court upheld repayment of laundry deductions and the High Court’s Courts Act interest order, but said the employers could charge for accommodation. It sent the accommodation damages question back for a rehearing.

Court of Appeal · [2017] IECA 252

Who, what, where, when and why

Who

See the report below for the parties involved.

What

The court upheld repayment of laundry deductions and the High Court’s Courts Act interest order, but said the employers could charge for accommodation. It sent the accommodation damages question back for a rehearing.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Nenagh
  • Limerick
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court had found that the companies deliberately recorded fewer hours than the workers had worked, causing substantial underpayment. That finding was not appealed. It also found that accommodation deductions were unjustified and that laundry deductions breached the contracts.

The Court of Appeal has ordered a rehearing to determine damages for 27 Portuguese workers who were housed in substandard accommodation while working on the N7 Nenagh–Limerick road project. It allowed the employers’ appeal only on whether they could charge for accommodation, while upholding the ruling on laundry deductions and statutory interest.

The linked appeals concerned three groups of employees of Portuguese companies trading in Ireland as RAC Éire. The workers, mostly construction operatives, worked on the project between 2007 and 2009. One plaintiff, a cleaner, was also among them. The employees claimed the companies breached their employment contracts through underpayment and deductions from wages.

The High Court had found that the companies deliberately recorded fewer hours than the workers had worked, causing substantial underpayment. That finding was not appealed. It also found that accommodation deductions were unjustified and that laundry deductions breached the contracts.

The Court of Appeal left the High Court’s findings about the poor accommodation undisturbed. Evidence before the High Court described overcrowded rooms, inadequate sanitary facilities, recurring sewage-tank overflows, vermin and no potable water. The appeal court accepted that the accommodation fell far short of the standard the contracts contemplated, but concluded the workers had received accommodation and were not entitled to recover every accommodation deduction on the basis that there had been a total failure of consideration.

The court nevertheless held that the workers could seek damages for inconvenience, distress and loss of enjoyment caused by the substandard accommodation. It remitted that issue to the High Court for a rehearing on damages only. The judgment did not set the amount of any such damages.

The laundry deductions were treated differently. The contracts set a charge by weight, but the companies had not weighed the laundry. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision that the deductions were not made in accordance with the contracts and that the workers were entitled to recover them in full.

The employers also challenged the High Court’s award of Courts Act interest at 8% from the start of proceedings in September 2012 to judgment in March 2016. The Court of Appeal rejected that challenge. It held that the statutory interest rate applied when a court orders interest, and that the High Court had properly exercised its discretion to award interest in this case.

The High Court had awarded €364,290 in total, with individual awards ranging from €26,928 to €53,346. The final amounts remained to be determined following the rehearing on accommodation damages.

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