The High Court set aside a third-party notice against Italian equipment maker Angelo Po after finding that Bunzl Outsourcing Services (Ireland) Limited had waited too long to seek its involvement in a personal injuries case.
Mr Justice Hogan ruled on 24 May 2012 that the delay breached the requirements of section 27(1)(b) of the Civil Liability Act 1961 and infringed Angelo Po’s rights to fair procedures and a hearing within a reasonable time. The application before him concerned only the third-party notice; the judgment did not determine the plaintiff’s injury claim or establish who was responsible for the incident.
The plaintiff, chef Gunther Freisberg, says an electrical flash occurred on a soup kettle at the Farnham Radisson Hotel in County Cavan on 10 October 2006, causing him to believe he had received a small electric shock. He claimed personal injuries. Angelo Po had supplied the kettle to Bunzl in April 2006, and Bunzl supplied it to Farnham Resort Limited, which operated the hotel and employed Mr Freisberg.
After the incident, Angelo Po sent a technician to inspect the kettle. The technician apparently found it undamaged apart from an exploded light fixture, and replacement lamps were sent to Bunzl in December 2006.
Mr Freisberg began proceedings against Farnham and Bunzl in April 2008. Bunzl wrote to Angelo Po in March 2011 seeking an indemnity and contribution, but did not apply for leave to join it until December that year. The notice was served in March 2012, shortly before the personal injuries action had been scheduled for hearing.
Bunzl argued that it needed time to investigate causation. Its engineer’s December 2011 report suggested moisture may have caused a short circuit near the bulb wiring. The judge accepted that investigation was reasonable, but said the causation issue had been apparent from the start and Bunzl had not explained why it took so long to commission an engineering report or comply with earlier procedural obligations.
The judge found the delay had materially prejudiced Angelo Po, including by bringing it into the case days before the scheduled trial and depriving it of the opportunity to rely on the limitation period against the plaintiff. He concluded that the notice could not stand. The judgment sets aside that notice; it does not decide the underlying personal injuries proceedings.