The High Court dismissed a family’s claim for damages over alleged vibration damage to their former home near the Corrib gas pipeline, finding they had not proved that traffic associated with the project caused or contributed to the damage.
Mr Justice Gilligan delivered the judgment on 24 January 2013 in consolidated proceedings against Mayo County Council and Roadbridge Limited, which handled the case on behalf of Shell E&P Ireland Limited. The plaintiffs claimed negligence, nuisance and breaches of constitutional rights and legitimate expectation. The court’s decision was that the claim failed; it did not determine a damages award.
The plaintiffs said convoys of heavy goods vehicles travelling on the road beside Cuan na Farraige, at Aughoose, Pullathomas, caused cracks to appear in the property during summer 2008. They described up to 90 to 120 lorries a day, counting return journeys, and sought damages for the property’s loss and damage. The defendants disputed both the traffic levels and the alleged cause of the cracks.
The judge found there was no Shell or Roadbridge traffic heading to the Glengad site before 8 July 2008. He accepted evidence that, between 8 and 29 July, Shell vehicle numbers reached double figures on only one day, when 11 vehicles passed the property. Combining the figures for the defendants, there were no more than 36 lorry movements on any day during the critical period from 8 to 21 July. The judge found the plaintiffs mistaken about the amount and timing of the traffic they recalled.
The plaintiffs relied on evidence from three engineers. The judge considered that their assessments depended on the plaintiffs’ account of traffic, which he found inaccurate, and that the testing was insufficient to establish vibration damage on the balance of probabilities. He also noted that recommended monitoring and investigative work had not been carried out. One engineer’s proposed soil tests, estimated in evidence to cost €6,000 to €8,000, were not performed.
The defendants’ engineer, John Flaherty, attributed the cracks to factors including shrinkage, weathering and building materials exposed to the Atlantic climate. The judge preferred his evidence, including his view that the cracks were not consistent with subsidence. He also accepted vibration expert Dr David Hillar’s evidence that the traffic vibration was below levels associated with building damage.
The court concluded the plaintiffs had not established that the defendants’ vehicles caused or contributed to the cracking and damage. The claim was dismissed.