The Court of Appeal has rejected Eamonn Brett’s appeal over a property at 4-6 Barrett Street, Ballina, and ordered that it vest in Joe Miley and Partners (Dublin) Limited, which is in voluntary liquidation.
In a judgment delivered on 11 February 2025, Ms Justice Pilkington upheld the High Court’s finding that the Brett Miley Partnership had agreed in 2009 to transfer its interest in the property to the company. The court found that the company held the entire beneficial interest, while the partnership held the bare legal title after the property was conveyed to it in 2013.
The property, comprising a residence and a lock-up shop, had been purchased by the partnership. The full purchase price had been paid by 2007. The dispute arose after the company’s liquidator, Aidan Garcia Diaz, sought to have the property transferred to the company.
The liquidator relied on company records, including accounts that treated the property as a company asset and tax returns signed by the Bretts when they were directors. Brett disputed the claimed debt that had formed the basis for the agreement, alleging that company auditor MQ’s reconciliation was flawed and that Joseph Miley had misappropriated between €5 million and €7 million from the company. The liquidator accepted that there had been substantial dissipation of funds, which remained under investigation.
The Court of Appeal said those allegations did not establish a basis to set aside the property agreement. Brett’s case alleged wrongdoing by Miley and possibly the auditor against the company; it did not allege fraudulent misrepresentation by the company to the partnership. The court also rejected Brett’s request for recognition of a personal one-third share, saying any interest was held as a partnership asset.
The High Court had declared the property company property and appointed a solicitor as trustee under section 25 of the Trustee Act 1893 to execute transfer documents. The appeal court instead made a vesting order under section 26(vi), finding that the partnership had been required to transfer the property and had failed to do so. The order vests the property, as described in the 2013 deeds, in the company. The court said the section 596 declaration under the Companies Act 2014 was no longer necessary given the vesting order.
Brett was wholly unsuccessful in the appeal. The respondent was awarded costs, to be adjudicated if the parties do not agree. The judgment allows Brett 14 days to file a written submission proposing an alternative order; the respondent may reply within a further 14 days. If no such notification is made, the proposed orders will be made.