The Circuit Court has cancelled a Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) determination order against a Dublin tenant and directed the RTB to rehear the matter, after finding good and substantial reasons for her failure to attend an earlier hearing.
Judge Jennifer O’Brien made the order under section 125 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004. The judgment, delivered on 25 July 2024, says the court was satisfied that the tenant’s literacy and health issues, family situation, vulnerability, recovery from addiction and her son’s actions explained her absence.
The case arose from an appeal concerning enforcement of an RTB determination order and vacant possession of a dwelling. The RTB had found that the tenant breached tenancy obligations, upheld a termination notice and ordered vacant possession after an adjudication hearing in November 2021, which she did not attend. No appeal was filed to the Residential Tenancies Tribunal. The RTB issued its determination order in February 2022.
Clúid Housing Association applied to the District Court to enforce the order. The tenant later challenged the District Court decision and argued that procedural fairness and material considerations had not been addressed. Her submissions cited literacy and health difficulties, her family circumstances and a claim that her son had caused the damage. She also argued that an order for possession required an individual proportionality assessment, referring to constitutional protection for the home.
Clúid’s position, as summarised in the judgment, was that the enforcement court’s powers were limited to the statutory grounds and that these issues belonged before the RTB. The judgment records that the parties agreed the relevant section 124 grounds concerned procedural fairness and material considerations.
Judge O’Brien cancelled the determination order dated 9 February 2022 and directed that the matter be freshly determined by the RTB following a rehearing. The judgment does not decide whether the tenant breached her obligations or whether the termination notice was valid. Nor does it make a further determination under section 124 on enforcement or vacant possession. The judge said that, given the decision under section 125, no further section 124 determination was proposed.
The court also expressed the view that fairness and proportionality are part of a just adjudication process and that the Residential Tenancies Act operates subject to constitutional protections for the dwelling and the landlord’s property rights. It did not resolve the proportionality issue in this case.