A development company at the centre of a dispute with a businesswoman over alleged overheating in her €6m Ballsbridge, Dublin, penthouse apartment “flatly contradicts” her claims, the High Court heard.
Aideen O’Byrne claims that due to a failure to maintain or repair the district heating system the temperatures in her Lansdowne Place apartment – thought to be the most expensive in Ireland at the time she bought it – have reached “unbearable” highs of 33 degrees.
Temperatures in lobby areas have been recorded to reach 29 degrees, she says.
Ms O’Byrne was last week given an interim injunction preventing the developer from transferring its beneficial interest in the buildings and common areas to an owners’ management company until problems are resolved.
‘He is 13 and he’s huge. He will be the next Wayne Dundon’: Limerick on edge as a new generation takes over gangland
‘There’s a menace, an edge to life in America that wasn’t there before. And the possibility of dark stuff’
My mother’s plan to leave her house to my sister and I could create more problems than solutions
The Macron shove is not a sign of a very French love story, but something more disturbing
The case is against the developer, Copper Bridge C 2015 ICAV, and O’Connor Sutton Cronin and Associates Ltd.
That interim injunction application was made ex parte, with only the O’Byrne side represented.
The case came back before Mr Justice Brian Cregan on Thursday when Hugh O’Keeffe SC, for Copper Bridge, said his client had a full defence to the merits of this case and had experts who “flatly contradict” Ms Byrne’s claims.
“We spent three years trying to address them without any progress”, he said. He was seeking an early trial as his side wanted the matter determined as quickly as possible.
Mr O’Keeffe said it was also their case in relation to the substance of the injunction preventing a transfer of interests that the transfer had already happened. It was in accordance with required standards upon the making of a statutory declaration of completion of the development under the Multi Unit Development (MUD) Act, the court heard.
The legal interest had previously been transferred and the transfer in accordance with MUD takes place upon completion of the statutory declaration, he said.
Gavin Mooney SC, for Ms O’Byrne, said it was curious that the statutory declaration took place on April 3 when his side had already been on inquiry into the matter.
Mr Mooney said if he now has to seek to change his application to one of setting aside that transfer of beneficial interest “then so be it”.
He also said he was also seeking to join the Lansdowne Place Owners’ Management Company (OMC) as a defendant in the proceedings.
While the first application was only against the developer, after “we did not get very far” his side approached the OMC to see if they would assist, he said.
“But it was not forthcoming and the OMC has now targeted us because we seem to have annoyed them,” he said.
Siobhán Gaffney, for the OMC, said her clients first wanted to set out on affidavit their position in relation to Mr Mooney’s application, but it was their case that the OMC was now “being dragged into the proceedings” when it was only responsible for the common areas and the issue in relation to overheating was a structural and engineering matter.
Deirdre Ní Fhloinn, for the co-defendant, said they supported the developer’s request for an early trial.
Mr Justice Cregan said that given the overheating also allegedly affected the common areas and that excess heat was alleged to be coming from pipes and fittings, he was satisfied to join the OMC to the case. Ms O’Byrne would have to amend her papers, he said.
Mr Mooney asked he be allowed to do so after a forensic engineer’s report was completed.
The judge, who continued the terms of the interim injunction, gave directions for exchange of papers and adjourned the matter to next month.
