Achill man claims Mondeo lights are ‘defective and dangerous’

A CIRCUIT Court judge has ruled that a civil action brought against the Ford motor company regarding ‘defective’ headlights on their Mondeo range should be heard in the Circuit Court and not go to arbitration.
Judge James O’Donohue made the order during a sitting of Castlebar Circuit Civil Court after he found that an agreement between the plaintiff, Michael Corrigan and Ford was ‘null and void’.
Mr Corrigan of Bunnacurry, Achill, brought the case against JJ Griffiths Ltd and Henry Ford and Sons Ltd, claiming the headlights on his 151 registered Ford Mondeo are ‘defective and dangerous’.
The court heard that a report from Liam Cotter, a consulting motoring engineer on behalf of Ford, found that there was a problem with the lights. Another report by Brian Greene, a Chief Engineer with motor assessors, Assess Ireland, stated that the lights posed a danger to road users and recommended that the car should not be driven at night.
During the hearing Mr Paul McGettigan, counsel for Mr Corrigan, made reference to the fact that in the US, Ford had to recall a number of Ford Fusions, the North American equivalent of the Mondeo, due to issues with defective lights.
While acknowledging that Mr Corrigan ‘could have a case’, Mr Eoin Garavan, counsel for Ford, stated that Mr Cotter had found the headlights were compliant with the regulations. He said that any dispute between the parties should be resolved in arbitration and not in the courts.
Mr Corrigan, who works as a motor assessor, bought the car from JJ Griffiths Ltd, a Ford dealership in Castlebar in 2015. The court heard that he had been a loyal Ford customer for over 40 years and had bought 27 Ford vehicles in that time.
Mr McGettigan said that although the lights were advertised as ‘second to none’, they were defective to such a degree that his client could be subject to prosecution if they were examined by the Gardaí.
“The lights are defective and seriously dangerous,” he said. “The lights are so defective that when it was assessed by engineers, the plaintiff was told not to drive it during the hours of darkness and that he could be subject to prosecution.”

‘Null and void’
He argued that as a result of the defects the agreement between Mr Corrigan and Ford should be null and void and he is entitled to a rescission. He said the case should stay in the court system in order for Ford to file a defence and not to allow the case to go to the ‘never-neverland’ of arbitration. Mr McGettigan added the case was of public importance and should be heard in public.
Mr Garavan said arbitration was the appropriate forum to hear the dispute and if agreed an order of rescission can be made there. He argued that case law ruled in his client’s favour and the dispute should be heard in arbitration.
Judge O’Donohue said that it was commonsense that a car that cannot be used at night was not ‘much use’. He described the dispute as ‘unusual’ but said he was happy to let the case go to arbitration if Ford supplies Mr Corrigan with a new car until the matter is resolved.
Mr McGettigan said his client was amenable to accept the ruling but after taking instructions, Mr Garavan said his clients would not be in a position to agree.
After hearing further legal argument, Judge O’Donohue said on the basis of the affidavit of the engineer’s reports and the dangers of driving the car during darkness, he had decided in those circumstances to allow the case to remain in the Circuit Court.
He said his ruling was not a criticism of Ford but because Mr Corrigan could not drive his car at night, it was a reason not to send the dispute to arbitration. He gave Ford seven days to file a defence and gave liberty for the plaintiff to apply to seek disclosure. He added that the case should be set down as a matter of urgency.