Judgment: 2025-11-05 · Court archive

High Court orders sale process for Meath property if Gaffney judgment debts remain unpaid

High Court · [2025] IEHC 602

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Alan Gaffney
  • Derek Gaffney
  • Philip Gaffney
  • Mr Justice Conleth Bradley
What

High Court orders sale process for Meath property if Gaffney judgment debts remain unpaid

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • County Meath
  • High Court
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Philip Gaffney had asked the court to delay the final ruling because of other proceedings which he said challenged the judgment mortgage and lis pendens, as well as matters before the Court of Appeal. The judge declined to defer matters, as he had previously done when asked to postpone delivery of the principal judgment.

The High Court has made final orders allowing steps towards the sale of a County Meath property if judgment debts owed to Alan and Derek Gaffney are not discharged within six months.

Mr Justice Conleth Bradley delivered the ruling on costs and final orders on 5 November 2025 following an earlier substantive judgment in the dispute.

The plaintiffs hold judgment debts arising from a Court of Appeal order made in May 2023 and amended in July of that year. Alan Gaffney is owed US$272,043.70 and Derek Gaffney US$100,000, together with statutory interest.

The High Court declared that the judgment mortgage registered against Folio 3976, County Meath, is well charged against the defendants’ interests in the property. It also ordered an account of other charges affecting the property and an inquiry into their priorities.

If the debts and continuing interest are not paid within six months, the County Registrar for Meath is authorised to take the necessary steps to sell the property and distribute the proceeds in satisfaction of the judgment mortgage. Execution of those sale-related orders was stayed for six months from perfection of the order.

Philip Gaffney had asked the court to delay the final ruling because of other proceedings which he said challenged the judgment mortgage and lis pendens, as well as matters before the Court of Appeal. The judge declined to defer matters, as he had previously done when asked to postpone delivery of the principal judgment.

The court also dealt with costs arising from a series of interlocutory applications. The plaintiffs were awarded costs after successfully opposing Philip Gaffney’s motions concerning discovery, court records, removal of the judgment mortgage and procedural directions. They also received 50% of the costs of their own motion to extend time and vary parts of the Circuit Court order.

The ruling does not determine the separate proceedings which Philip Gaffney said were pending.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review