Bonnybridge couple lose 'angel's share' fungus claim against Diageo

A couple who claimed that the "angel's share" from a whisky bond had blighted their property have lost their long-running case against major drinks firm Diageo.

Thomas and Gail Chalmers claimed that the vapour caused damage to outdoor furniture and their house in Bonnybridge, near Falkirk.

The couple brought a claim for £40,000 compensation against the company, maintaining that blackening in and around their property required cleaning and was "unsightly and depressing".

Judge Lord Young concluded that the discoloration, which developed over time, did not amount to "a material loss or inconvenience" or was "destructive of the ordinary comfort of life".

The "angel's share" is the term given to the loss of whisky volume, into the wooden cask and through evaporation, as the spirit matures. Up to 2% can enter the atmosphere a year.

The couple were given the go-ahead to take the case to court in 2019 after initially launching the action in 2014.

The couple bought their house, which was part of a modern estate of more than 200 homes, in 2002.

The Court of Session in Edinburgh heard that they were attracted to the property which had a nature reserve at the back and a playpark area at the front.

Diageo operated a bonded warehouse complex to the south-west of the nature reserve from the early 1980s and there are now nine bonded warehouses for maturing whisky.

Lord Young said: "In this action, the pursuers (the Chalmers) claim that the defenders (Diageo) have created a nuisance which affects the amenity of their property.

"They claim that ethanol which evaporates into the atmosphere from the whisky casks stimulates the germination, growth and development of a fungus called baudoinia which has caused blackening to the exterior of the house."

The court heard that the couple were aware that there were bonded warehouses beyond the nature reserve but that did not trigger any concerns when they were considering buying the four-bedroom house.

Thomas Chalmers first noticed an issue in the couple's second year at the house when he saw black dust, which was difficult to remove, on patio paving, children's toys and garden furniture.

Gail Chalmers said she wanted to remain at the house, which she regarded as her family home, but found the continual work required exhausting.

Lord Young said: "I accept that there is a degree of interference with their use and enjoyment of their property.

"But I am not persuaded that the pursuers have proved that it is of such a degree that it goes beyond what a householder in an urban development close to an established industrial estate can be expected to tolerate."