Flatley faces full court battle over mansion
RIVERDANCE star Michael Flatley is gearing up for a full court battle over allegedly defective repairs carried out at his Castlehyde mansion, after the insurers he is suing dropped a bid to force him into mediation.
The Commercial Court heard that the insurers had accepted that the case was not suitable for mediation.
They had previously argued that the legal proceedings should be halted to allow the mediation to take place out of court.
Mr Flatley went to the fast-track commercial wing of the High Court, seeking €30million to fix the allegedly defective works.
The dancer, who is battling cancer and is currently in Miami, Florida, has sued a number of defendants including Austin Newport Group Limited, the alleged main contractor that carried out over €4million worth of remediation works on Castlehyde after a fire in 2016.
He claims those works did not deal with toxic ‘carcinogenic’ PVC residue or chloride contamination caused by smoke damage from the fire, which was present on the walls and furniture of the property.
Mr Flatley, 65, told the court ‘defective’ works have left him, his wife and son unable to live in his beloved and historic home in Fermoy, Co. Cork. He claims he is due €80,000 a month in insurance payments while he is out of the house. His claims have been denied. The other defendants in the case include the insurers of Castlehyde: Am Amlin Underwriting Ltd, AXAs XL Underwriting Ltd, and Hamilton Managing Agency Ltd. Their barrister, Martin Hayden, had previously argued he did not believe his clients should be in court ‘at all’. Gavan Carty, solicitor for the three insurers, had explained that Mr Flatley made a claim on his insurance policy over the fire and in May 2018 reached a settlement agreement with the underwriters for a €3.9million payment.
He said this agreement contained a clause stating that Mr Flatley acknowledged the underwriters would not be called upon to provide compliance certificates for any remediation works, and that the Riverdance star should satisfy himself that the repairs were adequate.
Mr Carty claimed that any dispute arising about the implementation of the agreement should be referred in the first instance to a mediator, and in default of mediation to an arbitrator.
Last week, Mr Flatley was granted permission from the Commercial Court to broaden his claim, to include an allegation that the insurers had failed to warn him in relation to the settlement agreement.
The case continues.