National Aquatic Centre - Controversy

Controversy

The National Aquatic Centre has been embroiled in controversy almost from the beginning, from the concept to construction to the operating arrangements, culminating in a complex 10 year VAT dispute between the former operator Dublin Waterworld and the state agency CSID which the state ultimately lost.

The Government (through its company, CSID) took a High Court case to repossess the centre due to failure of Dublin Waterworld to pay a "Vat" bill of over €10 million. CSID also alleged that the NAC was not being properly maintained. The High Court appointed expert found numerous flaws in the building but stated that these were not the fault of the Operator Dublin Waterworld.

On 1 Jan 2005, the roof of the NAC fell off in a storm, experts appointed by the Government found that the builders had not installed the roof in accordance with the building regulations.

The first case was settled with both sides paying their own costs and Dublin Waterworld agreeing to vacate the Centre. However CSID succeeded with its VAT claim in the High Court following arbitration. The arbitrator found that CSID was correct, the Supreme Court would later state that the Arbitrator, the then incoming president of the Institute of Taxation had made significant and fundamental errors.

Whilst Dublin Waterworld operated the Centre without a state subsidy, the tax payer has now subsequently subsidised the NAC by over €2m annually under the operation of CSID.

In late 2005 CSID attempted through Section 214 of the Companies Act to have Dublin Waterworld put into liquidation and to have resrictive orders taken against its Directors. Dublin Waterworld avoided this by obtaining a stay in the Supreme Court.

In 2009 Dublin Waterworld discovered through the freedom of information act that CSID had not obtained a valid valuation of the lease and that CSID's valuer had misrepresented his qualifications.

In 2010 the Supreme Court heard Dublin Waterworld's appeal against a High Court and Arbitrators decision that it owed Campus and Stadium Ireland Development €10,254,600 in VAT.

In April 2010 Supreme Court unanimously found for Dublin Waterworld on all grounds and stated that the Arbitrator, Mr Dermot O Brien the incoming President of the Irish Taxation Institute had "gravely misled himself on the law". Dublin Waterworld made Irish legal history by being the first ever private company to succeed in overturning both an arbitrators decision and a High Court decision together.

In May 2010 Campus and Stadium Ireland Development had sought to have the VAT dispute reheard at Arbitration. The Supreme court refused to appoint the previous Arbitrator but permitted a new arbitration. On 26 July 2010 Campus and Stadium Ireland Development withdrew from the second arbitration and confirmed that their VAT charge of €10,254,600 was incorrect. In late 2010 the Revenue Commissioners confirmed that CSID was never entitled to charge VAT.

Costs for the High Court, arbitration and Supreme Court were awarded to Dublin Waterworld Ltd.

The conduct of Campus and Stadium Ireland Development limited is currently under investigation by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) when it emerged that they had ignored both the advice of the Attorney General and the Comptroller and Auditor General, who both advised against taking the VAT case.

At a hearing of the PAC on 9 November 2011 the Secretary General Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport claimed that the Attorney General had reversed his 2004 advice and that the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners had also advised CSID to take the VAT case.