Van Morrison and wife ‘upset’ by work on neighbours’ home

Michelle Morrison’s High Court action claims neighbours breached deal over shrubbery

Michelle Morrison  arriving at the Four Courts with her daughter, Claudia and her sister Laura for the continuation of a High Court hearing. Photograph: Collins Courts
Michelle Morrison arriving at the Four Courts with her daughter, Claudia and her sister Laura for the continuation of a High Court hearing. Photograph: Collins Courts

An architect who represented singer Van Morrison and his wife Michelle during negotiations over the redevelopment of their neighbours' Dalkey home told the High Court they were "upset" over the work.

Professor James Horan said he wrote a letter on behalf of the Morrisons in 2008 in which he said they were "particularly upset". It also stated all matters before that time had been "for discussion only".

The letter was sent to new architects representing the Morrisons’ neighbours’, Conor and Eileen Kavanagh, who re-developed their Mount Alverno home at Sorrento Road and Nerano Road, Dalkey.

In the letter, Prof Horan said the Morrisons had asked him to question “if the events to date have any validity” and, in particular, discussions about a minor land swop to facilitate the creation of a new driveway into Mount Alverno.

READ SOME MORE

He was being cross-examined by Esmonde Keane SC, for the Kavanaghs, on the third day of Ms Morrison’s action against the Kavanaghs.

She claims they breached an agreement that shrubbery planting carried out as part of the redevelopment of Mount Alverno would not affect the Morrisons’ views of Dalkey Island and Dalkey Sound from their Kilross House home.

The Kavanaghs deny there was any such agreement or that such views existed.

On Thursday, Prof Horan told the court that, throughout discussions with various architects representing the Kavanaghs from 2004, it had been agreed the views would be preserved.

After the Kavanaghs got planning permission in 2007 and construction work started, the Morrisons had a number of concerns about what was happening, including the location of a site office hut in Mount Alverno, certain windows in the redevelopment and noise from generators.

When a new firm of architects was brought in by the Kavanaghs, Prof Horan became concerned about the bona fides of the new architects particularly as they had agreed a particular window in the redevelopment would be removed but it was not.

Mr Keane put it to Prof Horan, as a result of the letter questioning what had happened to date and no land swap having taken place, the Kavanaghs had to go back to a design for a “jagged wall” along the driveway.

Prof Horan replied he could not say what happened after this. His engagement with the Morrisons was terminated in 2008 because he believed “my clients might have preferred someone who might have been more aggressive”, he said.

When counsel put to him there was no binding agreement, and nothing in writing, about preserving the views, Prof Horan said he had a verbal agreement with previous architects representing the Kavanaghs.

He was unable to say whether there was anything in writing but there may have been, he said. He had not gone through every single document in a half metre- high file of documents returned to him after Ms Morrison got new solicitors to represent her, he added.

Prof Horan agreed with Mr Keane the first “neighbourly gesture” between the parties was when the Kavanaghs allowed the Morrisons use a second entrance to Mount Alverno, at Nerano Road, as an access for the purpose of relaying the driveway into Kilross House. He also agreed Mr Kavanagh had allowed workers for the Morrisons to store materials in the Kavanagh garage.

The case continues.