Court Overturns €20k Tenant Award

The decision from The High Court has revoked an outcome from a residential disputes tribunal that previously rewarded a five-member family €20,000 due to severe damp and mould in their flat in central Dublin, which they claimed had resulted in health problems. The determining judge, Mr Justice Alexander Owens, found that the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) appeals tribunal had not handled the grievance brought forward by Tetyana and Vassyl Soroka against their property holder, Tuath Housing Association, correctly. Tuath Housing Association is one of the leading non-profit renting organisations in Ireland, providing affordable rentals to those who are unable to afford private letting.

Owens stated that the tribunal had erroneously assumed that some legal responsibility was owed by Tuath to the couple to persuade the apartment block’s management firm to address the architectural flaws which were leading to water seepage in their unit. He noted that the tribunal was required to adhere strictly to the law as outlined in the leasing agreement and the rules pertaining to a landlord’s maintenance duties. In this circumstance, the tribunal deviated from what it was supposed to decide on.

The order to compensate and the original decision from the RTB was stopped by him and the grievance of the Sorokas was sent back to the tribunal for a new review.

The Sorokas, who forked out €129 weekly as rent, had lodged a complaint with the RTB, citing constant rain leaks in their Grand Canal Dock area duplex since they became occupants in 2006. They provided their case that existing mould and dampness exposed them and their three children to an array of respiratory and other health-related issues.

Being the owners of 60 out of the 290 flats in the Gallery Quay development which has been experiencing issues since 2009, Tuath informed the RTB tribunal. They agreed that the Soroka’s flat was not up to scratch and required improvements. Though remediation tasks were performed, Tuath claimed that the responsibility of the structural and other necessary repairs were the building management firm, Gallery Quay Management Company’s responsibility.

The Sorokas family rejected an alternative three-bedroom property nearby, proposed by Tuath, stating that it was either improperly located or didn’t meet their family size requirements. The family brought their case to a tribunal. During the tribunal’s late 2020 ruling on the disagreement, it documented a 2021 court case resolution involving building faults, which pitted the building’s management company against its insurance firm. Rainwater prevention repairs had not yet been implemented at the time of the tribunal hearing.

The tribunal ruled that Tuath, being the principal property owner within the building, should have either acted sooner to implement repairs or pressed the management organisation to do so. In light of the length of the upkeep breach, which was deemed to be of severe significance, the Sorokas were granted a €20,000 award.

Tuath took the dispute to the High Court, querying the extent to which a landlord can steer clear of pointless repairs when the damage arises from building defects that are not under their responsibility. The judgement of Mr Justice Owens was that landlords’ duties to uphold the structure’s integrity, based on the 2004 Residential Tenancies Act, pertain strictly to the dwelling’s structure. Instead of pondering over how these responsibilities should be considered in relation to a flat within a housing block, the RTB tribunal deemed Tuath liable to push the management firm to act on behalf of their tenants.

The judge remarked that the 2004 Act doesn’t mandate landlords to coax housing block management companies into fulfilling their contract-based commitment to execute repairs to structures or other components. Furthermore, landlords are under no obligation to litigate against developers, builders or architects who may be guilty of faulty design or construction. He finalised his judgement by stating that it would be unfeasible to incorporate this ambiguous responsibility into a rental agreement.

Condividi