UCC v Electricity Supply Board (Unapproved) [2021] IESC 21 (24 March 2021)

UCC v Electricity Supply Board (Unapproved) [2021] IESC 21 (24 March 2021)

The Supreme Court held that ESB could not, at this late stage, rely on s.35(1)(i) Civil Liability Act, 1961 to attribute the negligence of UCC's professional advisers to UCC, as this argument was not raised in the lower courts and would cause prejudice to UCC. The Court further held that while UCC was not vicariously liable for its advisers' negligence, it could still be found contributorily negligent for failing to take reasonable precautions against a well-known flood risk, independent of professional advice. The Court declined to make a final apportionment of liability at this stage, as the matter of damages and causation had been remitted to the High Court.

Citation
[2021] IESC 21
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: University College Cork - National University of Ireland; Defendant/respondent: The Electricity Supply Board
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Cross Appeal Following Remittal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Cross-appeal by ESB dismissed; ESB not permitted to rely on s.35(1)(i) Civil Liability Act, 1961; issue of apportionment of liability remitted to High Court for further determination.
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Apportionment of Liability, Flood Damage, Professional Negligence
Tort Law Civil Liability Contributory Negligence Vicarious Liability Apportionment of Liability Flood Damage Professional Negligence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

University College Cork - National University of Ireland

Plaintiff/appellant

The Electricity Supply Board

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Cross Appeal Following Remittal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether UCC was contributorily negligent for flood damage to its property in 2009
  2. 2 Whether ESB could rely on s.35(1)(i) Civil Liability Act, 1961 to attribute professional advisers' negligence to UCC
  3. 3 Proper apportionment of liability between UCC and ESB

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that ESB could not, at this late stage, rely on s.35(1)(i) Civil Liability Act, 1961 to attribute the negligence of UCC's professional advisers to UCC, as this argument was not raised in the lower courts and would cause prejudice to UCC. The Court further held that while UCC was not vicariously liable for its advisers' negligence, it could still be found contributorily negligent for failing to take reasonable precautions against a well-known flood risk, independent of professional advice. The Court declined to make a final apportionment of liability at this stage, as the matter of damages and causation had been remitted to the High Court.

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal by ESB dismissed; ESB not permitted to rely on s.35(1)(i) Civil Liability Act, 1961; issue of apportionment of liability remitted to High Court for further determination.

Orders

  • ESB's cross-appeal on s.35(1)(i) dismissed
  • No final apportionment of contributory negligence at this stage