The Court of Appeal has overturned orders giving receiver Tom Kavanagh liberty to seek the attachment and committal of Tom Morrin, ruling that Morrin was not given a fair hearing before the orders were made.
In a judgment delivered on 12 April 2019, Ms Justice Baker allowed Morrin’s appeal against a High Court decision of 5 March 2019. She directed that the matter return immediately to the High Court Chancery List on the first Tuesday of the new legal term, to be determined by another High Court judge.
The dispute concerns Folio lands in County Kildare over which Kavanagh was appointed receiver in 2013. Earlier orders required Morrin to surrender possession and control of the lands and remove livestock and machinery. A consent order made on 18 December 2018 required him to deliver up possession and remove vehicles, machinery, chattels and animals, with a stay until 4 February 2019.
Morrin had not vacated the lands or removed those items by that date. Kavanagh then sought orders allowing him to pursue attachment and committal for breach of the consent order. The High Court granted the orders on 5 March 2019, after refusing Morrin’s requests for a short adjournment.
Morrin argued on appeal that he had not received a fair hearing, that the judge had prejudged the motion, that no specific contempt finding had been made, and that he was not in contempt. Kavanagh defended the decision and maintained that Morrin remained in breach of the order.
The Court of Appeal did not decide whether Morrin was in contempt or address his other grounds, including concerns about service and alleged prejudgment. Instead, it focused on whether the hearing was fair. Justice Baker found that Morrin’s counsel had not been allowed to make even brief submissions on an argument that the consent order could be read as containing an implied term. That argument related to a proposed sale of the property that had fallen through and was also raised in separate plenary proceedings Morrin issued.
The Court held that, because the motion could affect Morrin’s liberty, he needed an opportunity to present the argument and supporting legal authorities. The High Court’s two-week stay of its orders did not cure the lack of fair process, Justice Baker said.
The appeal succeeded on that procedural ground alone. The Court directed an immediate return to the High Court, warning that its decision should not be used to delay the contempt motion or any other application seeking Morrin’s departure from the land.