Judgment: 2025-07-31 · Court archive

High Court refuses Stillorgan homeowner’s bid to judicially review earlier possession appeal

High Court · [2025] IEHC 433

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Declan Egan (Applicant)
  • Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC (Respondent)
  • Garrett Simons (Judge)
  • Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Ltd
What

High Court refuses Stillorgan homeowner’s bid to judicially review earlier possession appeal

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Auburn
  • High Court
  • Circuit Court
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that the application faced a fundamental jurisdictional problem. Judicial review is a supervisory remedy used by the High Court to control decisions of inferior courts, tribunals and public bodies. It cannot be used by one High Court judge to review or set aside a decision made by another High Court judge following an inter partes hearing.

The High Court has refused Declan Egan permission to use judicial review to challenge an earlier High Court ruling concerning possession of a property at Old Dublin Road in Stillorgan.

The underlying proceedings were brought by Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC. Pepper Finance asserts that it succeeded to the mortgagee’s interest and related debt under a mortgage originally entered into by Egan and his late wife with Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Ltd.

The property is identified in the judgment as “Auburn”, Old Dublin Road, Stillorgan, County Dublin.

The Circuit Court made an order for possession on December 4, 2023. Egan appealed that decision to the High Court. His appeal was dismissed in a written judgment delivered on January 22, 2025.

Egan then began judicial review proceedings in April 2025. He sought an order quashing that High Court decision and asked for the possession case to be sent back to the Circuit Court for a full rehearing.

Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that the application faced a fundamental jurisdictional problem. Judicial review is a supervisory remedy used by the High Court to control decisions of inferior courts, tribunals and public bodies. It cannot be used by one High Court judge to review or set aside a decision made by another High Court judge following an inter partes hearing.

Egan argued that a High Court judge hearing an appeal from the Circuit Court was effectively exercising the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction, and therefore the resulting decision should itself be open to judicial review.

The court rejected that argument. It held that the High Court remains a superior court of record when exercising its appellate jurisdiction and does not temporarily acquire the status of an inferior court.

The judge also noted that legislation provides that a High Court decision on this type of Circuit Court appeal is final and conclusive, subject only to a constitutional appeal route to the Supreme Court.

Leave to seek judicial review was therefore refused. No costs order was made because the application was heard without notice to Pepper Finance.

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