The High Court has dismissed a claim by a Cork company Triatic Ltd that it had a legitimate expectation that Cork County Council would choose Triatic as buyer of the Fort Camden site at Crosshaven, which Triatic sought to develop as a marine and heritage tourism centre.
The court had heard that Fort Camden, which got its name from the Earl of Camden, the lord lieutenant of Ireland between 1795 and 1798, is recognised internationally as one of the world's finest remaining examples of a classic coastal artillery fort.
It was handed over to the government in 1938 and renamed Fort Meagher, in honour of Thomas Francis Meagher, one of the Young Irelanders. It was handed over by the Department of Defence in late 1988 to the council on the basis that the council would develop it for tourism and amenity purposes.
However, while the council secured physical possession of the site, ownership of it remained in the State, a fact about which Triatic was unaware until 1995.
Triatic, whose directors are brothers James and William O'Brien, had claimed an involvement with the council from 1995 relating to the Fort Camden (otherwise known as Fort Meagher) site and that it had a "legitimate expectation" that the council would not deal with another party in relation to the site pending the bona fide completion of negotiations with Triatic on its proposals for Fort Camden.
It also claimed that the factual circumstances relating to Triatic's dealing regarding the Fort Camden site were such as to constitute a contract between the sides in the terms of the legitimate expectation contended for.
Triatic claims that, by expressing an intention to re-advertise Fort Camden with a view to securing tenders for the purchase and development of it from companies other than Triatic, the council had acted unlawfully and in breach of contract.
In a reserved judgment yesterday, Ms Justice Mary Laffoy held that Triatic had failed to make out its claim of legitimate expectation and was not entitled to the €150,000 damages it had sought.
In her view, there was a large grain of truth in the suggestion by the council that Triatic was seeking to extend the notion of legitimate expectation to insulate it from the ordinary commercial risks which are inherent in negotiations, she said.
The judge noted that since the Triatic proceedings were initiated in 1998, no steps had been taken by the council to re-advertise for the development or disposal of Fort Camden. Triatic had claimed the council had advertised the proposed sale of Fort Camden in September 1989.