Companies ‘dishonestly’ supplied insulation to Grenfell Tower, High Court hears

Two companies which provided insulation for the Grenfell Tower allegedly sold the material “dishonestly” and failed to warn that it was not suitable for high-rise buildings, the High Court has heard.

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) is seeking millions in damages from Celotex and Saint-Gobain Construction Products UK, saying the insulation they produced and sold was one of the causes of the “uncontrollable” fire that killed 72 people in 2017.

The council has six claims running against various companies that were involved with supplying or maintaining material in the Grenfell Tower, including the supplier of a fridge-freezer which RBKC says was the origin of the fire.

In written submissions, David Turner KC, for RBKC, said Celotex and Saint-Gobain were involved in a conspiracy around the testing, sale and marketing of the insulation, known as RS5000.

He said the companies were “choosing to exploit the ignorance of the market”, were “failing to carry out the necessary and proper testing” and sold the product “based on a test the details of which were dishonestly concealed”.

The companies also failed to warn RBKC, suppliers and the wider market about the unsuitability of the product for high-rise buildings, selling it “in circumstances where it was unsafe to do so”, Mr Turner added.

Celotex and Saint-Gobain deny any wrongdoing.

At a preliminary hearing on Wednesday, lawyers for RBKC applied to strike out parts of Celotex’s defence for being too long.

Mr Turner described Celotex’s defence documents as a “singular achievement” for writing two-thirds the length of Leo Tolstoy’s War And Peace in just five months.

He added: “The question is whether Celotex’s achievement is to be celebrated or deprecated.”

The barrister continued: “Celotex has sat through a lengthy public inquiry, assimilated a vast amount of information and has shared that information without discrimination as to whether it needs to do so for the purposes of these proceedings.”

Craig Orr KC, for Celotex and Saint-Gobain, justified the length of the documents because of the “serious and wide-ranging” allegations against the companies.

In written submissions, Mr Orr alleged RBKC, which was the owner of the tower at the time of the fire, had carried out “deliberate wrongdoing, wilful default, illegality and criminal offences” between 2009 and 2017.

He also claimed RBKC made “structural and governance failings”, in particular, failings in relation to a refurbishment of the tower in 2011.

The barrister added: “The claimants’ complaints that the above matters have been pleaded at unnecessary length and/or in repetitive fashion are unfounded.

“The allegations made by Celotex are complex, serious and are required to be properly pleaded.

“They span many years and involve multiple failings on the part of a number of different entities, performing different roles and different functions.”

He also said the length of the defence documents are necessary because of “the serious and wide-ranging nature of the conspiracy/fraud case advanced by the claimants” as well as “the need for Celotex to respond clearly and with precision.”

The hearing, before Mrs Justice Jefford, is due to conclude on Thursday.