Weir v Corporation of Dún Laoghaire

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: GRIFFIN J.,O'HIGGINS C.J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1984
• Neutral Citation: 1982 WJSC-SC 3220
• Docket Number: [S.C. No. 15 of 1982],(15-1982)
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 01 January 1984

WEIR v. DUNLAOGHAIRE CORPORATION

WEIR

v.

CORPORATION OF DUN LAOGHAIRE

1982 WJSC-SC 3220

(15-1982)

THE SUPREME COURT

1 JUDGMENT delivered on the 20th day of December 1982by O'HIGGINS C.J.

2 This is an appeal against a jury's verdict awarding damages to the Plaintiff. The appeal rests on two submissions made by the Defendants. In the first place they contend that the trial Judge ought to have withdrawn the case from the jury because there was no evidence that the interference with the roadway which caused or contributed to the Plaintiff's injuries was either authorised or permitted by them. Secondly, they claim as an alternative, that the case ought to have been withdrawn from the jury because there was no evidence ofnegligence.

3 I propose to deal in the first instance with the second ground of appeal. The evidence established that on the Sunday morning of the accident the Plaintiff whowas an elderly lady was, in the company of her husband, crossing the road at Royal Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire. She was proceeding from Dun Laoghaire Church towards a new shopping centre on the far side of the road. As she neared the side to which she was proceeding she tripped, fell and suffered injuries. There was evidence that the cause of her fall was a difference in road levels of two inches or more along a line where a new lay-by for buses was being constructed. No warning of this difference in level was given and the entire roadway which was tarmacadam, appeared uniform. I am quite satisfied that on these facts it was proper that the case should have gone to the jury on the issue of negligence. The jury having found negligence I do not think that such finding can be disturbed.

4 As to the first ground it appears that the difference in road levels which caused or contributed to the Plaintiff's fall and injuries came about in the following circumstances. A company called MEPC (Ireland) Limited sought planning permission from the Defendants as theplanning authority under the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act 1963for the development of a site along Marine Road as a shopping centre. Permission was obtained from the Defendants as the planning authority on the 12th December 1973 but an appeal was lodged by an objector. The appeal was decided and final planning permission granted by the Minister for Local Government on the 21st August 1973. A condition of this permission was that a bus lay-by be provided by the developers, if required by the planning authority, on Marine Road. When the building of the shopping centre was completed a firm of contractors called John Paul & Company proceeded to erect or construct a bus lay-by along Marine Road. This involved considerable interference with the roadway and adjoining footpath. The layout of this bus lay-by was agreed with the Defendants. This appears from the evidence of their Assistant Borough Engineer. In addition, from his evidence it appears that the carrying out of the work was known to the Defendants....