The High Court has ruled that a 2002 transfer of farmland in County Donegal gave Sean Roohan the equitable interest in the lands, even though he was not registered as owner until 2017. The court said Peter Roohan’s estate retained only the legal title when he died in 2012.
Ms Justice Nuala Butler delivered the judgment on 8 April 2022 in proceedings brought by Peter Roohan’s widow, Rosaleen Roohan. The special summons asked whether the transfer failed because it had not been registered before Peter’s death and, if so, whether the lands remained part of his estate.
The lands comprise about 50 hectares in six folios. Peter signed the voluntary transfer to his son Sean on 1 January 2002 for “natural love and affection”. The judgment records evidence that Sean farmed the lands and received related agricultural payments. Registration was delayed; Sean died in March 2016, and the transfer was registered in July 2017.
The judge rejected the widow’s argument that non-registration meant the transfer had no legal effect. She considered statutory provisions and earlier court decisions, concluding that an unregistered transfer could pass a beneficial interest in registered land. In this case, she found the transfer had been acted on by Peter and Sean. She therefore answered the first question in the negative: the transfer did not fail, and Sean held the equitable estate when Peter died.
The judgment did not formally answer whether the lands remained part of Peter’s estate, because that question arose only if the transfer had failed. The judge said the wider question depended on disputed facts and was unsuitable for determination through a special summons without a full hearing. She noted potential issues concerning Sean’s contribution to clearing his father’s debts, occupation of the lands and competing claims, while stressing that those matters were not determined.
The judge also said the 2017 registration’s validity was not properly before her and made no decision on it. She declined to dismiss the proceedings on the defendant’s procedural objections, while noting that several objections had merit. The ruling determined the legal effect of the 2002 transfer; it did not resolve the widow’s separate Northern Ireland claim for provision from her husband’s estate.