Repossession decision in the High Court?

[Shindig]

Hi

I'm wondering if anybody has seen this or knows how valid this is?

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Hi Shindig

There is very little detail and very little context. It hasn't been reported as newsworthy anywhere else.

I wouldn't trust the New Land League. Wait until you get confirmation from someone like Ross Maguire about the significance of this.

Brendan

 

[Brendan Burgess]

A couple of posters on boards.ie have summarised the judgement here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95570499&postcount=3940

You can read the full judgement here:

http://www.thehub-ireland.com/ms-justice-murphys-ruling/

Here are the last lines from the judgement

'In doing so, the court observes the defendant' success on this aspect of the case is a pyrrhic victory. In circumstances where there is no dispute that the defendants borrowed the money and no dispute that they ceased making the agreed repayments in August 2011. this judgement merely postpones the day of reckoning while their debts keeps mounting. So be it."

 

[Shindig]

Thanks Brendan.... The last line of the judgement sums it up really

 

[Jim Stafford]

Dillon Eustace Solicitors have given a useful summary of the implications of the Justice Murphy judgment. It may be viewed on their web site:

[broken link removed]

[broken link removed]

(Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank v. Finnegan & Ward)


Effect of the judgment

Dillon Eustace say that the scope of this judgment has been limited to a significant degree by the enactment of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 and the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013 which acts give new jurisdiction to the Circuit Court which is not dependent on rateable valuation.

This case is however authority for the proposition that the lacuna identified by the Court in this case can be successfully relied upon by debtors to have possession proceedings struck out for lack of jurisdiction where the following situations apply:

• Possession proceedings of any domestic premises;

• Where the domestic premises was constructed post 2nd May, 2002 (and so not rateable);

• The mortgage / charge is dated pre – 1 December 2009; and

• The possession proceedings were commenced in the Circuit Court before 31 July 2013.

In cases where the above criteria do apply and this lacuna is raised as a defence by a debtor financial institutions can simply re-issue fresh possession proceedings which will have the benefit of the 2013 Act.

Jim Stafford

 

[demoivre]

A couple of posters on boards.ie have summarised the judgement here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95570499&postcount=3940

You can read the full judgement here:

http://www.thehub-ireland.com/ms-justice-murphys-ruling/

Here are the last lines from the judgement

'In doing so, the court observes the defendant' success on this aspect of the case is a pyrrhic victory. In circumstances where there is no dispute that the defendants borrowed the money and no dispute that they ceased making the agreed repayments in August 2011. this judgement merely postpones the day of reckoning while their debts keeps mounting. So be it."

Not necessarily as the debtor's circumstances may improve. Changes to ISI legislation, promised before the Dáil summer holidays, may well be enacted making a PIA workable in cases where to date it wouldn't have been.