Landlord of protected Dublin building given 9 months to address safety failings

Tom Tuite

A judge has ordered a landlord to address urgent safety issues at a protected building in Dublin previously taken over by dozens of squatters.

Property owner and retired solicitor Mel Kilraine was prosecuted by the local authority over failings to comply with an enforcement notice to bring 9 Belvedere Place, Dublin 1, which is divided into 10 flats, up to the required standards.

The case was before Judge Anthony Halpin at Dublin District Court on Tuesday for the 20th time.

He applied the Probation of Offenders Act, but ordered Kilraine to pay €5,950 in prosecution costs and set a nine-month deadline for completing the building work in line with best practice.

Last year and in 2024, the property was in the headlines due to separate proceedings in the Circuit Court to remove 27 squatters in the building who had prevented workers from entering to carry out vitally needed modifications.

Earlier, Judge Halpin had also gone to the property to assess the situation, which he said had been very helpful.

Solicitor Michael Quinlan for Dublin City Council (DCC) told the court that the landlord had to carry out a list of refurbishments to the protected structure.

DCC demanded structural engineer assessments of the entire building, particularly addressing cracking brickwork, the leaking roof and other relevant conservation repairs to ensure the building was secure and stable, in line with best practice.

It was adjourned for some time to prepare an expert report, but Kilraine wanted time for a second report which delayed the case.

Mr Quinlan said the notice had been partially complied with but substantially not, and that the quality of the work done remained a concern for the council.

Joe Jackson BL, for Kilraine, told Judge Halpin that his client's difficulties with the building were well known.

The barrister asked the judge to review the contents of a medical report on Kilraine's recovery from serious medical health issues and his ongoing treatment.

That has limited his ability to do things for himself and attend to his own affairs.

Admittedly, Mr Jackson said, the situation regarding the report was not satisfactory from the council's point of view.

Jackson said an engineering firm had been "over-demanding" about the work to be done, and Kilraine had lined up another firm to do the same work to the same standard, and it was set to start straight away.

The barrister said the landlord was not ignoring the matter, and that it would be for the council to review the work. If they were not satisfied with compliance, he imagined they would be back in court again.

Jackson said that he has yet to be provided with a time frame for completing the improvements.

Judge Halpin said the new firm must carry out the work to at least the minimum standard sought by DCC.

"We are now at a juncture in this case where there is a clear meeting of minds where the work is going to be carried out," he said, but added that it was not conceivable that the work would be finished within six months.

Judge Halpin noted the defendant had no prior offences and "has come around to the council's way of thinking".

He spared him a conviction, but on top of the costs order, he directed the landlord to complete the work within nine months, which Mr Jackson said was very agreeable.

He added that his client was worried about the property, which remained vulnerable to "another incursion".