by Matthew Austin March-16-2016 in Litigation & Dispute Resolution
A recent decision the Court of Appeal addressed the question of when the Statute of Limitations begins to run for claims based in tort.
The facts of the case were simple. Two houses were built in or around 2004. The foundations for the houses were completed in March that year. On 4 September 2004, the architect involved issued a certificate of compliance with planning permission and with building regulations. The houses in question were completed in January/February 2005. In December 2005 cracks appeared in both of the houses. The legal proceedings were not commenced until 30 November 2010.
The relevant limitation period under the Statute of Limitations, 1957 (as amended) for negligence actions of this kind and/or contract actions is six years. The defending parties argued that the relevant limitation period began to run on the claim in March 2004 when the foundations were completed. The foundations were the ultimate cause of the cracking. The plaintiff/appellant argued that the limitation period did not begin to run until 2005 when the cracks appeared.
The Court of Appeal decided that the issues before it boiled down to two relatively simple questions. First, when did the plaintiffs suffer damage by reason of the negligence of the defendants? Second, when was the tort of negligence complete? In reality the Court of Appeal was satisfied that the answer to both of these questions was the same.
The President of the Court of Appeal cited the case of Hegarty v O’Loughran [1990] 1 I.R. 148 wherein Finlay C.J. stated: “A tort is not completed until such time as damage has been caused by a wrong, a wrong which does not cause damage not being actionable in the context with which we are dealing. It must necessarily follow that a cause of action in tort has not accrued until at least such time as the two necessary component parts of the tort have occurred, namely, the wrong and the damage.”
The President of the Court of Appeal found that it is clear that negligence by itself without the accompaniment of damage or loss is not actionable. He noted that the plaintiffs did not suffer damage at the time when the defective foundations were installed. He stated: “When the defective foundation was put in, the only complaint that the plaintiffs could have had was that the foundation was defective. They had not suffered any damage at that point – there was merely a defective foundation – but that is not damage of a kind that is actionable in tort.”
The President of the Court of Appeal found that: “The evidence here is that the foundation of these houses was defective, but it did not cause damage at that time. It caused damage in December 2005. The evidence is not that there was hidden damage which became discoverable at a later point; it is that the damage resulted from the defective foundations happened in December 2005.”
The Court of Appeal was therefore satisfied that because the damage had not occurred until December 2005, that was the point at which the Statute of Limitations began to run and therefore the proceedings were initiated inside the six-year limitation period and could be properly maintained.
A full copy of the decision can be found here.
Back to Full NewsShare this article:
About the Author
Matthew Austin
Matthew is a partner in the Commercial & Business team and has considerable expertise in a range of practice areas, having acted for Irish and International clients in domestic and multi-jurisdictional issues. Matthew has advised in civil and administrative law disputes and in regulatory and advisory matters including insolvency/restructuring, IP, defamation and media law, competition and consumer protection and data protection.