Breach of Contract in Irish Residential Construction – Key Cases & Legal Remedies

Introduction to Breach of Contract in Construction

Disputes between homeowners and builders are common in Ireland, especially in residential construction projects lacking a formal RIAI contract. Even without a written agreement, an agreement still exists and is governed by ordinary contract law principles, including oral or written promises. In Ireland, even a handshake or a series of emails can be viewed as a binding contract if the essential elements (offer, acceptance, and consideration) are present.

In the absence of a standard form contract, such as the RIAI contract, both parties must rely on implied terms and general law to fill the gaps. Irish consumer protection law and common law impose certain duties on builders. For instance, builders are expected to perform work with proper skill and to utilize materials of good quality.

This report examines recent Irish case law from 2020 to 2025 that highlights how courts have addressed breaches of contract in residential construction disputes. We focus on cases where homeowners have taken action against builders for issues like:

• Poor workmanship

• Structurally unsound work

• Refusal to allow site access

• Failure to deliver value for money

  
  

We also highlight successful cases where homeowners have recovered deposits or partial payments. Finally, we will outline the practical legal remedies available to Irish homeowners as of 2024/2025 and the steps to consider when contemplating legal action.

Implied Rights and Obligations Without a Formal Contract

In circumstances where there is no formal written contract or where only a basic agreement exists, Irish law implies key terms into the homeowner-builder relationship:

Workmanship and Quality

The builder must perform work with proper skill, care, and in a "good and workmanlike manner." Additionally, materials must be sound and fit for purpose. These terms are enforced by the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980, along with the Consumer Rights Act 2022, which necessitate services to meet reasonable standards. If a builder delivers faulty or unsafe work, it constitutes a breach of contract, as they failed to adhere to these implied quality standards.

Duty to Cooperate

Both parties have an implied duty to cooperate and not hinder each other. Homeowners must provide reasonable access and should not obstruct a builder’s work. Conversely, builders must allow homeowners to inspect the progress of the work. Irish courts have recognized an implied right for homeowners to inspect properties during construction. A builder's refusal to permit access can be deemed a breach of contract, as illustrated in various cases.

Time for Completion

If no timeline is agreed upon, the law implies that the builder should complete the project within a reasonable timeframe. What constitutes a "reasonable" timeframe can vary depending on the circumstances. However, significant delays caused by a builder can lead to a breach of contract. Homeowners suffering losses due to unreasonable delays may claim damages.

Payment and Price

When no fixed price is set, the homeowner is expected to pay a reasonable price for the completed work. Builders can seek payment on a quantum meruit basis (payment for the value of the work done). If a homeowner has already made upfront or installment payments and the builder’s work is defective or incomplete, the homeowner is justified in withholding further payment and can also claim refunds for overpayments. If the work is substandard or incomplete, the law treats this as a breach, enabling homeowners to seek either the cost of repairs or refunds for improperly executed work.

In disputes arising from informal agreements, courts will reconstruct contracts from all available evidence, including emails, texts, invoices, and conversations. For example, if a homeowner pays a deposit for an extension but the builder abandons the job, the court can determine that the builder breached the contract due to failure to perform with due skill or within a reasonable timeframe. Remedies may include the return of the deposit or damages.

Case Examples of Breach of Contract in Home Builds (2020–2025)

Recent cases highlight how Irish courts manage such disputes. Here is a summary of key cases and their outcomes relevant to homeowners:

Case (Year)	Issue	Outcome
O’Reilly v Neville (2017 HC)	New house with major defects (poor workmanship). Builder resisted fully fixing issues.	Specific Performance & Damages: High Court ordered the builder to complete the required remedial works (specific performance of the building contract) and also to pay the homeowners’ costs of alternative accommodation while repairs were done. (The homeowners had to rent elsewhere due to the defects.) This showed the court ensuring the homeowners got a finished, sound house and were compensated for interim losses.
Mackin v Deane (2010 HC)	Buyer contracted for a house build, but builder refused access for inspection and delivered a house not in compliance with planning (attic conversion issue).	Contract Rescinded – Deposit Recovered: High Court held the builder’s lack of cooperation (refusing reasonable inspection) and non-compliance was a fundamental breach. The purchaser was entitled to rescind the contract and get the deposit back. The court emphasized an implied entitlement for a buyer to inspect the building, and the builder’s failure breached the duty to cooperate, justifying return of all monies paid.

Sources: Irish High Court and Supreme Court judgments; Irish Examiner report.

In the examples highlighted above, Irish courts have provided various remedies. These range from ordering builders to complete the work properly and pay related costs, as seen in O’Reilly v Neville, to allowing homeowners to cancel contracts and reclaim their money, as in Mackin v Deane. They have also enabled lawsuits for latent defects to be initiated years later, as seen in Brandley. In each case, the guiding principle remains that a builder's failure to deliver a solid and skillfully constructed property constitutes a breach of contract. This entitles homeowners to be restored to the state they would have been in had the contract been effectively fulfilled.

It's important to note that even partial payments or deposits can be recovered under common law, especially when the builder's breach is significant. Irish courts recognize the concept of "total failure of consideration." If a homeowner has paid money but received either no value or substandard work, they can claim restitution. For example, in Mackin, the buyer received their deposit back because the delivered house did not match their expectations. Similarly, if a builder abandons a project after accepting advance payments, homeowners can sue for breach and seek refunds, often framed as damages to cover hiring a replacement or the unused funds. The implied terms under the 1980 Act and Consumer Rights Act support homeowners' rights to refunds or price reductions when services were not provided appropriately.

Legal Remedies Available to Homeowners (2024/2025)

Homeowners in Ireland who encounter a defective build or a defaulting builder should consider several practical legal remedies and steps:

1. Communication and Documentation

Before pursuing litigation, homeowners should notify the builder in writing of the issues. They should give the builder a chance to fix the problems, often through a "letter before action." This letter clearly lists the defects or unfinished work and establishes a reasonable deadline for correction. Documenting everything serves two purposes. It shows the homeowner’s reasonableness, which could influence cost awards later. Additionally, it may resolve the issue without needing to go to court. Keeping records of all communication is vital. Also, documentation of problems – taking photos of defects and retaining any engineer’s or architect’s reports – is crucial, as courts rely heavily on evidence.

2. Engage Expert Assessment

For structural problems or claims of poor workmanship, homeowners should obtain an independent engineer or building surveyor to inspect and report. This expert report identifies any non-compliance with standards or plans and forms the case's foundation regarding what went wrong and the costs to remedy it. In the Circuit Court, a practice direction encourages exchanging a "schedule of defects and costings" along with photographic evidence, emphasizing the importance of factual proof in these disputes.

3. Check for Warranty or Insurance

Some new homes come with a structural warranty, like the HomeBond 10-year guarantee for builders who are registered. If the builder had liability insurance or if a specific compliance certificate was issued, there may be other claims avenues. While these are not strictly "common law" remedies, it is practical to explore warranty or insurance claims, as they might offer quicker or more certain recovery. However, many renovation or one-off builds may lack such coverage, especially without a formal contract.

4. Invoke the Consumer Rights Act 2022

As of November 2022, the Consumer Rights Act 2022 enhances legal rights related to services, including building services. This law allows homeowners to demand that builders rectify issues for free within a reasonable timeframe if their work does not meet the agreed standards. If the builder cannot or refuses to remedy the situation, homeowners may terminate the contract and receive a full refund. Alternatively, for less serious defects, homeowners might seek a price reduction that reflects the work's diminished value. These rights align with the pre-existing terms implied in the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act. When invoking these statutory rights, homeowners should formally notify the builder that they are requesting a repair or refund under the Act. This establishes a clear legal pathway for resolving issues. Should the builder continue to refuse, such documentation will support the homeowner's case in court. Notably, the law requires builders to issue refunds within 14 days if a contract is terminated.

5. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) – Adjudication or Mediation

The statutory Construction Contracts Act 2013 provides a fast-track adjudication process for payment disputes. However, this Act does not apply to many one-off home builds or renovations for owner-occupiers under 200 m². Therefore, most private homeowner-builder contracts are exempt from adjudication. If the Act applies, homeowners can refer disputes to adjudication, which is faster than court. In the case of most home construction issues, mediation is always an option if both parties agree. Given the significant cost of litigation, proposing mediation through an independent expert or solicitor can lead to settlements, such as builders agreeing to partial refunds or overseeing the completion of works. Courts generally encourage parties to attempt resolution; a reasonable settlement offer, if declined, may influence who pays legal costs later.

6. Taking Legal Action – Courts

If informal resolution fails, homeowners can file a civil lawsuit for breach of contract (and/or negligence). Here’s what homeowners need to know about choosing the appropriate court based on claims:

• Small Claims Court: For monetary claims up to €2,000, homeowners can utilize the Small Claims procedure (via District Court), which is low cost and does not typically require legal representation.

• District Court: Claims up to €15,000 can be filed here, covering modest repair costs or partial refunds.

• Circuit Court: This handles claims from €15,001 to €75,000 (or €60,000 for personal injuries). Many construction defect cases fall within this range. The Circuit Court can also issue specific performance orders.

• High Court: Claims over €75,000 can be escalated to this level, especially if extensive demolition or rebuilding is necessary. High Court litigation tends to be costly and is typically reserved for major disputes or situations with greater legal implications.

  
  

Homeowners can seek several legal remedies in court:

• Damages: Monetary compensation covering repairs necessary to rectify the house’s issues. This includes costs of remedying defects and may also cover consequential losses caused by the builder’s breach.

• Rescission and Restitution: In cases involving fundamental breaches, homeowners can rescind the contract and receive refund payments. Each party returns what they received, and homeowners may have to allow builders to retrieve unused materials on site while obtaining their deposits back.

• Specific Performance: This could compel the builder to fulfill their contractual duties, such as completing or fixing the work per specifications. Courts are cautious about this for personal service contracts like construction, but may order builders to remediate defects under certain conditions.

  
  

Homeowners should push for the discovery of key documents from builders, such as plans, invoices, and inspection reports. Courts recognize the significance of relevant evidence and will grant necessary documentation.

When homeowners win a case, they typically receive compensation for legal costs in addition to damages. Conversely, if litigation drags unnecessarily, homeowners might lose cost awards.

7. Enforcement of Judgment

Winning a judgment does not guarantee timely collection. If builders fail to pay voluntarily, homeowners can enforce judgments by registering them as charges against the builder’s property, seizing assets, or even initiating bankruptcy proceedings if warranted. Unfortunately, some rogue builders may dissolve their companies or lack sufficient assets, complicating recovery. In these situations, homeowners should consider if third parties could be liable, such as architects or engineers who may have certified flawed work.

Conclusion and Practical Advice

Homeowners facing a breach of contract by a builder enjoy strong legal protections under Irish law, even without a formal written agreement. Courts uphold fundamental workmanship standards and fairness. Recent case law confirms that homeowners can reclaim paid amounts, whether through deposit returns, repair costs, or compelling builders to fix jobs correctly. Key remedies include damages, rescission, and specific performance, ensuring homeowners are not financially disadvantaged due to subpar work.

Homeowners considering legal action should:

• Collect evidence of the builder’s breaches, such as photographs and professional reports.

• Clearly state their rights under the implied terms or Consumer Rights Act when addressing the builder.

• Allow builders the opportunity to remedy defects, strengthening their position if legal actions arise.

• Seek professional guidance early on. Consulting with a construction law solicitor or a knowledgeable quantity surveyor can clarify strategies for dispute resolution.

• Be conscious of time limits – typically six years to initiate claims from the breach date or when defects become apparent.

• Budget adequately for the legal process. While modest claims may not require significant resources, larger claims may necessitate considerations for legal representation and expert evidence.

  
  

Irish homeowners are not powerless when facing breaches by builders. By leveraging implied warranties of quality, common law rights to compensation, and modern consumer law remedies, they can find justice—whether that means securing repairs or financial reimbursements. Courts have shown a strong willingness to back homeowners who have been wronged by substandard building work, as long as the homeowner compiles a coherent case backed by solid evidence. Above all, do not overlook defective or incomplete work—the law offers recourse to reclaim funds or ensure proper completion.

Sources and Further Reading

• Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980, s.39 (implied terms for services).

• Consumer Rights Act 2022 (Parts 3-5, new consumer remedies for services).

• O’Reilly & Anor v Neville & Ors [2017] IEHC 228 – High Court (Binchy J.), judgment 31 July 2017 (defects in house build – specific performance and damages).

• Mackin v Deane [2010] IEHC 192 – High Court (Finlay Geoghegan J.), 20 May 2010 (new home sale, refusal of inspection – contract rescinded, deposit returned).

• Brandley v Deane [2017] IESC 83 – Supreme Court, 15 Nov 2017 (latent defect, when cause of action accrues).

• Moloney & Feeley v Erris Homes Ltd [2012] (High Court, Laffoy J.) – structural defects case (referenced in Irish Times).

• Rory Connolly QS – Unsigned Residential Building Contracts in Ireland (2023) – legal analysis of rights when no formal contract.

• Citizens Information – Problems with a service (updated Dec 2022) – explains consumer rights to remedy and refund for services.

• Courts Service of Ireland – Circuit Court Practice Direction CC08 (2009) – pre-trial steps for construction quality disputes.

• Irish Examiner – “Builders at centre of mica case ordered to give files to homeowners” (Ann O’Loughlin, 10 Mar 2025) – report on Donegal defective blocks litigation.