Up to 2,000 legal actions over mica defects may come before High Court by end of year
Of Naturally Aggregate, Structural Example Affected When An Is As Picture: Rocks Occurring Used Over Home Damage An File Niall The Carson/pa A Mica Makes Mica Time But, Weaker Concrete In In
There could be an estimated 2,000 legal actions before the end of the year - with a total value of €550m - over the mica controversy, it has been claimed in High Court proceedings.
There are 1,100 cases already issued and the first to come before the Commercial Court on Monday was by husband and wife teachers, Liam Ó'Dochartaigh and Greinne Bean Uí Dochartaigh, of Urbledreagh, Malin Head, Co. Donegal.
They are suing over damage from mica-containing concrete blocks and similar products used to build their home between 2005 and 2008. Mica is naturally occurring in rocks but, when used as an aggregate, makes concrete weaker over time.
The couple say they have been advised their home will have to be demolished and rebuilt. They may also include in their proceedings another rental property they own at Malin Road, Carndonagh, Co. Donegal, pending the results of tests on that property.
They are suing the block suppliers, Cassidy Brothers Concrete Products Ltd, Buncrana, Co. Donegal. It is claimed the firm, among other things, provided blocks and ready-mixed concrete which were not fit for purpose and did not meet the specifications advertised.
The case is also against Donegal County Council which, it is claimed, as the relevant "market surveillance authority" in relation to construction products, failed to ensure the Cassidy blocks were removed from circulation or to perform appropriate checks on the product.
The council also failed to carry out evaluations in relation to non-complying products manufactured by Cassidys and to appoint a sufficient number of officers to carry out monitoring, it is alleged.
They are also suing the National Standards Authority of Ireland (NSAI) claiming that as the national certification body it failed to adequately and/or fully perform its obligations. The NSAI also provided certification for Cassidy products and a system of factory production control and/or a quality management system in circumstances where the system was deficient, it is claimed.
The NSAI further failed to conduct a thorough inspection of the Cassidy manufacturing facility or to audit its operations with sufficient regularity, it is also claimed.
On Monday, the NSAI applied to Mr Justice Denis McDonald to have their action admitted to the fast-track Commercial Court.
The judge adjourned the application to January to allow discussions to take place between the parties on the number of "pathfinder" or test cases which will become a representative sample of as many cases as possible.
The NSAI brought the application because it says the solicitors representing the Ó'Dochartaighs have issued some 1,184 sets of proceedings related to mica and, by the end of 2022, that figure is expected to rise to 2,000.
The NSAI head of corporate services, Mairead Buckley, said in an affidavit the total value of the cases is estimated by the plaintiffs' lawyers, Coleman Legal, to be €550m. Coleman Legal has also said a small number of cases will help to determine the core issues across "potentially 2,000 cases".
Ms Buckley said that given the considerable economic value of the cases, as well as the complex issues involved, all the proceedings can be disposed of more conveniently and expeditiously in the commercial list.
Robert Fitzpatrick SC, for the Ó'Dochartaighs, said it was his side's intention to bring an application that the proceedings be case managed but there was an element of prematurity in the NSAI application to enter them into the Commercial Court. Counsel also said there are cases which will involve claims for personal injuries and there was therefore "a lot of work to be done".
A solicitor for Donegal County Council said her client was disputing the claims but did not oppose the entry application. There was no appearance for the Cassidys but Jarlath Fitzsimons SC, for the NSAI, said Denis Cassidy of the firm had received delivery of the papers and signed for them.
The judge said given the "obvious importance" of these cases, there was a need for them to be managed by the court and to identify what other representative cases exist. There was a need for a bit of investigation and discussion between the parties and therefore he was adjourning the application to enter the case to list until January.