High Court gives ‘Last Chance’ to resolve delays in defective blocks litigation
Judge warns that long-running case cannot be allowed to “continue to go around in circles”
Defective Blocks Ireland (DBI) has welcomed a Commercial Court decision to adjourn next week’s motions in the long-running defective blocks litigation, while fixing fresh hearing dates in October and making an order for costs in favour of the plaintiffs.
More than 2,400 homeowners are participating in the defective concrete blocks class action case, managed by Coleman Legal.
At another hearing on Tuesday, July 16, Ms Justice Eileen Roberts said motions concerning expert testing of quarry samples had been before the Court for too long and made clear that the case now requires sharper focus, firm timetables and meaningful progress from the experts involved.
Ms Justice Roberts set aside the two-day hearing previously fixed for 21 and 22 July and instead set down a new two-day hearing for 20 and 21 October 2026 to deal with the outstanding motions concerning testing of samples taken from Gransha Quarry.
She also directed that the matter return to court on 23 September for an update on an in-person meeting between the parties’ experts and the Danish Technological Institute (DTI) in Copenhagen, which is expected to take place in August.
In her ruling, Ms Justice Roberts acknowledged the “undoubtedly” high level of frustration at delays in completing the expert testing and said her aim was to secure “the shortest outcome in the long-term”, rather than allow the case to “continue to go around in circles”.
She described the adjournment as a “last chance” for the experts to narrow or resolve the remaining dispute over testing methodology before the motions are heard in October.
During the hearing, John Gordon SC, counsel for the homeowners, strongly opposed the application to adjourn.
He reminded the Court that the plaintiffs' motion had been brought at the invitation of the Court after, he said, the National Standards Authority of Ireland's expert had "consistently frustrated the completion of the work of DTI for over 12 months."
Mr Gordon argued that despite repeated requests from both DTI and the plaintiffs' expert, there had been no clear or workable explanation of the testing methodology being sought, arguing that the NSAI expert had repeatedly changed his position throughout the process.
Mr Gordon further told the Court that the continued delays were "really intolerable" for homeowners and "deeply prejudicial" to their interests. He argued that the litigation had "gone on for far too long" and urged the Court to allow the motions to proceed without further delay, stating: "We are dancing on the head of a pin here and we are losing valuable time." He also stated that the original motion brought by the NSAI "should never have been brought", arguing that "all it did was block the progress of the testing."
Mr Gordon also told the Court that DTI had repeatedly sought clarity on the additional testing requested by the NSAI's expert but had been unable to obtain clear instructions, saying the Danish institute wanted simply to complete its work in accordance with the recognised testing standards.
He argued that while further discussions could continue after the hearing if required, the Court should first hear and determine the motions so that the litigation could finally move forward
In a further development, Ms Justice Roberts ruled that the plaintiffs are entitled to the costs of Tuesday’s application, though she granted a stay on that order pending the determination of the proceedings.