Parties agree over injunctions at children’s hospital site
Residents claim homes damaged as a result of construction work at St James’s Hospital
Plans of the new National Children’s Hospital at St James’s Hospital, Dublin.
An agreement has been reached on a bid for injunctions in a dispute over damage allegedly caused to some houses located near the site of the new National Children’s Hospital in Dublin.
Nine residents from O’Reilly Avenue, Ceannt Fort and the Mount Brown areas of Dublin 8 have sued the National Paediatric Hospital Development Board and BAM Civil Limited, the firm building the hospital.
The residents, who live close to St James’s Hospital where the €1 billion children’s hospital is being constructed, claim their homes have been damaged as a result of certain works being carried out by the defendants.
They sought High Court orders including an injunction preventing works being done on the site until steps are taken to remediate and protect their property from sustaining any further damage.
The case, which was opposed by both BAM and the Hospital Development Board, opened before Mr Justice Richard Humphreys on Friday morning.
Later, following negotiations between the sides, John Rogers SC, for the residents, told the judge late on Friday evening the application for injunctions had been resolved “to the satisfaction of all parties”.
It was also agreed the matter could be adjourned until the full hearing of the action.
No details of the settlement agreement were revealed and the terms are confidential.
Mr Justice Humphreys congratulated the parties on coming to an agreement.
Earlier, Mr Rogers said his clients were not opposed to the new hospital being built and the injunction was not some “rogue application” brought by people with “a different agenda”.
His clients had sought orders primarily over “significant damage” their properties had already sustained and due to concerns of sustaining more damage in the future.
BAM, represented by Shane Murphy SC, and the board, represented by Jarlath Fitzsimons SC, had urged the court not to grant the injunctions on grounds including that works on the site of the new hospital could be halted.
The defendants had offered to go to mediation and seek a resolution to any difficulties that may have been caused by the construction works, the court also heard.