Protest outside Dublin social housing construction site has ended, court told

A protest which had halted work on a social housing scheme in West Dublin has ended, the High Court has heard.

K&J Townmore Construction Ltd, which has been contracted by Cluid Housing Association to build 65 social houses and apartments at Ladyswell Road, Mulhuddart, Dublin 15, had brought proceedings against protesters it claimed had been unlawfully blockading the site since mid-January.

On Thursday afternoon, when the case returned before Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds, she was told the protest, which had prevented Townmore’s workers and subcontractors from accessing or leaving the site, had ended.

Gary McCarthy SC, for Townmore, said the proceedings, which had been taken against Ms Alice Woods as she was the only identified protester, had been resolved following discussions. Counsel said Ms Woods was consenting to the making of orders prohibiting her and any other person with knowledge of the making of the order restraining the protesters from trespassing at or interfering with the access to the site.

Lawyers for Ms Woods said their client was consenting to the orders sought by Townmore but did not accept Townmore’s claim she was the protesters’ ringleader.

The action was taken when protesters, who had claimed they want some of the new houses allocated to “local” and “Irish” people, began to physically obstruct and stand in front of vehicles trying to enter or leave the site. The protesters used placards stating “Local houses for local people “More social housing for the Irish” and “Make the social housing list fair,”, Townmore, represented by Mr McCarthy and solicitor Tom Casey claimed.

This action had impacted on the firm’s ability to comply with its contractual obligations to complete the works on time, and damaged its reputation, it claimed. The firm also claimed the dispute was between Cluid and the residents and it was “caught in the middle”.

The company further claimed the protests have resulted in costs over €1.5m. It sought injunctions against the protesters when talks between those involved in the action and Cluid failed to resolve matters.

Ms Justice Reynolds welcomed the news the protest had ended and that Ms Woods was consenting to the orders. She said the court “would take a very serious view” if the orders were breached and the matter had to return before the court.

The judge expressed serious concern over the participation of school children, during school hours, in the protests. She also said “serious health and safety issues” had been raised arising from the protesters having prevented heavy vehicles from accessing the site.