Judgment: 2017-07-27 · Court archive

Court of Appeal orders release of land transfer instrument to former owners’ company

The court found that Cloughvalley Stores had a legitimate interest in seeing how its Monaghan land was transferred, and directed the Property Registration Authority to provide a certified copy, subject to any applicable fee.

Court of Appeal · [2017] IECA 231

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Brigid Quinn (Applicant)
  • Brigid Hoey
  • Gerard Hogan (Judge)
What

The court found that Cloughvalley Stores had a legitimate interest in seeing how its Monaghan land was transferred, and directed the Property Registration Authority to provide a certified copy, subject to any applicable fee.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • County Monaghan
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Delivering judgment on 27 July 2017, Mr Justice Gerard Hogan said the Land Registration Rules generally protect the confidentiality of title documents, while allowing access in special circumstances. He concluded that Cloughvalley had a legitimate interest in knowing how its land was transferred. That interest, pursued by the Quinns on the company’s behalf, met the special-circumstances test in Rule 159(9) of the Land Registration Rules 2012.

The Court of Appeal has ordered the Property Registration Authority (PRA) to provide Michael and Brigid Quinn with a certified copy of an instrument recording the transfer of land previously owned by their company, Cloughvalley Stores Ltd. The order is subject to payment of any applicable fee.

The appeal concerned a dealing instrument held in the Land Registry relating to Folio MN3294F in County Monaghan. The land was transferred to Johnny and Brigid Hoey by Allied Irish Banks plc, which acted as registered chargee and mortgagee in possession. The Quinns, who were Cloughvalley’s director and company secretary, sought access on the company’s behalf.

They said they needed the instrument to understand the sale of the company’s former land. Brigid Quinn disputed the sale’s authority, while the Quinns had also raised concerns about the receiver’s appointment and conduct. The PRA refused their applications, saying they had not shown special circumstances and that the transfer was made by the bank as mortgagee in possession, not by a receiver. The High Court dismissed their appeal in April 2016.

Delivering judgment on 27 July 2017, Mr Justice Gerard Hogan said the Land Registration Rules generally protect the confidentiality of title documents, while allowing access in special circumstances. He concluded that Cloughvalley had a legitimate interest in knowing how its land was transferred. That interest, pursued by the Quinns on the company’s behalf, met the special-circumstances test in Rule 159(9) of the Land Registration Rules 2012.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and directed the PRA to provide the certified copy. It rejected the view that the possibility of seeking the document through separate proceedings against the bank meant the Quinns had failed to establish special circumstances. The court did not determine whether the sale was valid or whether the receiver’s appointment or conduct was proper; the appeal concerned access to the instrument.

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