High Court begins to read judgment in Superwood case

The High Court yesterday began delivering its judgment on the longest-running action in the court's history in which a plastics manufacturing company is seeking £92 million (€116.8 million) damages plus interest following a fire at its Co Wicklow plant in 1987. Reading of the judgment is expected to take at least three days.

Mr Justice Smyth is giving his decision in an action to assess what level of compensation is to be paid to Superwood in its action against a number of insurance companies. The claim arises out of a fire which destroyed a facility for waste plastic at the Superwood plant in Bray, Co Wicklow, on October 26th, 1987.

Superwood had sued Sun Alliance Insurance Group, Prudential Assurance Co Ltd, Church and General Insurance Co Ltd and LLoyds. In 1998, the Supreme Court allowed Lloyds to settle its dispute with Superwood.

The matter originally came before the High Court in 1991 when Mr Justice O'Hanlon, since retired, rejected Superwood's claim for compensation after a 116-day hearing.

This was appealed to the Supreme Court which, following a 16-day hearing, upheld Superwood's appeal and returned the case to the High Court for a new hearing to assess damages.

The compensation claim had been repudiated by the insurance companies on grounds alleging fraud or that it was a claim exaggerated so excessively as to lead to the inference that it could not have been made honestly. The Supreme Court held that the repudiation by the insurers of the insurance policies was invalid.

In the part of his judgment that was read yesterday, Mr Justice Smyth held the claimants were Superwood Ltd, Superwood Exports Ltd and Superwood Chip.

When the original litigation started, the claim for compensation had risen from £2 million to £5 million. It now stands at £92 million and continues to rise.

Reviewing the evidence, the judge said the maintenance of records and book-keeping was wholly unsatisfactory and described the building which went on fire as a store integral to the production process but not the core manufacturing unit.

Reading of the judgment continues today.