A couple had to leave their Co Wicklow home because of noxious smells coming from a nearby landfill site, the High Court has heard.
Michael and Edel Mulvihill in late 2015 left their home at Roscath, Kilbride, because of odours from the Ballynagran landfill site. They are now living two miles away in “a small wooden chalet” with no running water, their counsel said.
They also claim their home was flooded in October and November 2006 and December 2008.
They have brought High Court proceedings against several allegedly linked commercial entities which they claim are the owners and operators of the site and are seeking damages for alleged negligence, breach of duty and nuisance.
Thomas Hogan SC, with Declan Wade BL, for the couple, said their case was that the flooding, which had never occurred previously on their lands, was caused by activities carried out at the landfill.
Constant problem
The 2008 flooding “effectively destroyed” the inside of their home, he said.
Odours from the site were almost a constant problem and adversely affected the family’s health, he added.
It is claimed the lands were being managed in a way that materials deposited on the site were generating noxious fumes which were escaping from the site and were being allowed permeate around the Mulvihill’s home.
The defendants include Greenstar Ltd, Greenstar Holdings Ltd and Greenstar Finance Company, all placed in receivership in 2012. The action is also against Greenstar Properties Ltd, Greenstar South East Limited, and Starrus LFG Holdings Ltd.
The Greenstar defendants, and Starrus LFG Holdings Ltd, which is in the process of being liquidated, have opted not to defend the Mulvihill’s claim, the court heard.
Two other defendants – Ballynagran Landfill Ltd and Grunberg Ltd, who respectively allegedly became the registered owner and operator of the landfill in 2014 – deny any liability. They claim they did not exist when the flooding occurred and that the claims against them are statue barred.
Starrus ECO Holding Ltd – which is involved in the transport of material to the site – says it should not be a defendant and has applied to be let out of the proceedings. That application is opposed by the couple.
The hearing continues.