Údarás loses claim over damaged premises

Údarás na Gaeltachta has lost its High Court claim that a clean water company is liable for damage to an industrial premises …

Údarás na Gaeltachta has lost its High Court claim that a clean water company is liable for damage to an industrial premises owned by the authority in Spiddal, Co Galway.

The Gaeltacht development authority had claimed the damage - significant cracking in the walls and floor slab of the premises - was due to ground heave resulting from leaks of sulphuric acid in 1993 from the premises occupied under lease by Uisce Glan Teoranta (UGT).

However, Mr Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill concluded it was highly unlikely such a discharge had happened. UGT had denied it had any liability for repairing damage to the premises and claimed the damage was caused by accumulated water pressure.

In his reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice O'Neill dismissed all the claims against UGT, including claims of negligence, breach of duty, nuisance and breach of contract. He said the source of the cracking, which had progressed to such an extent from late 1992 into early 1993 that a concrete cross beam was lifted off its supporting pillar, was the "very rare occurrence" known as "ground heave".

READ MORE

The authority claimed an escape of sulphuric acid was the cause of that heave, while the defendants and their experts vehemently contested this, the judge said. They denied there was any discharge of sulphuric acid and contended a potential explanation for the heave was water pressure resulting from a very high water table, very wet weather at the time and a discharge from an ESB ducting pipe.

Having analysed the expert evidence, the judge said he was satisfied it was "highly unlikely" there was any significant discharge or leakage of sulphuric acid into the ground. He believed the explanation by UGT's experts that a reaction between sulphates and water caused the formation of sulphuric acid in a dilute form was more likely to be correct.

The presence of sulphates in the soil was convincingly explained as an inevitable consequence of the manufacturing process carried on by UGT where large quantities of aluminium sulphate (alum) were manufactured. He accepted alum was essentially inert and harmless save to the extent that, in water, it reacts to form a dilute form of sulphuric acid.