The Court of Appeal has dismissed Patrick O’Connor’s appeal against the High Court’s refusal to let him institute further proceedings against the Property Registration Authority of Ireland. The court held that, while subject to an Isaac Wunder order, he needed High Court permission to appeal that refusal.
Mr O’Connor sought to challenge a High Court decision refusing leave to bring proceedings concerning receivership actions and borrowings secured against properties. His proposed claim included an argument that one receiver could no longer act alone after the other retired in 2020, making subsequent actions invalid.
A 2017 High Court order restrains Mr O’Connor from bringing proceedings concerning the properties or borrowings without prior leave from the President of the High Court or a judge nominated by the President. The Court of Appeal said the proposed proceedings fell within that order. It noted that Mr O’Connor had himself applied for leave to bring them.
The High Court had described the proposed proceedings as an abuse of process, frivolous and vexatious, and without prospect of success. It also found that they made broad allegations of misrepresentation, fraud, breach of trust and undue influence without particulars. The High Court rejected the proposed challenge to the remaining receiver’s authority.
The appeal was brought without leave. The Court of Appeal agreed with a recent decision holding that a person subject to a similar restraint order needed permission to appeal a refusal of permission to bring proceedings. Otherwise, the court said, the purpose of the restraint could be frustrated.
That procedural point was sufficient to dispose of the appeal. The court dismissed it, while adding that it considered the High Court’s judgment correct and the proposed proceedings a clear abuse of process. The appeal judgment did not grant leave to start the proposed proceedings.