The High Court has struck out a purported appeal by Patricia Mahon against a possession order, ruling that an appeal from a County Registrar’s order had to go to a judge of the Circuit Court. The court said it had no jurisdiction to hear the matter through the route taken.
The judgment does not decide whether the 2014 possession order should be set aside. Mr Justice Garrett Simons said Ms Mahon could seek to bring the matter before a Circuit Court judge, who would decide whether to extend the time for an appeal.
Promontoria (Field) DAC brought Circuit Court possession proceedings against Brendan Mahon and Patricia Mahon over a property registered under Folio 10786L. A County Registrar made a possession order on 10 October 2014 after no appearance was entered for the defendants. The order also stayed execution for four months and made no order as to costs. An execution order followed on 9 March 2016.
Ms Mahon said she had not been served and first learned of the possession order in June 2016, when the Sheriff attended at her family home. In an affidavit, she said her husband opened the post, including letters addressed to her, and left her only letters he wanted her to see. She said she would have participated in and defended the proceedings had she known about them.
In July 2016, the High Court Master extended time to serve and lodge a notice of appeal. Ms Mahon then lodged a notice of appeal to the High Court. At the hearing on 5 April 2019, the plaintiff’s counsel objected that the High Court could not hear an appeal directly from a County Registrar’s order.
Mr Justice Simons agreed. He said the statutory route for appealing a County Registrar’s order was to the Circuit Court, while the High Court’s statutory appeal jurisdiction concerned decisions of a Circuit Court judge. The High Court could not enlarge its appellate jurisdiction to hear this purported appeal.
The judge ordered the notice of appeal struck out and the Master’s 15 July 2016 order set aside. He noted that the result left Ms Mahon without an extant appeal against an order she said was made without her knowledge. Any application to appeal out of time before a Circuit Court judge, and whether time should be extended, remained for that court to decide.
The judgment said the parties had disputed whether settlement discussions between 2016 and 2018 resulted in a final agreement, but that question was outside the subject matter of this decision.