The High Court has dismissed Eamon Carthy’s proceedings against Ireland, the Attorney General and Brendan Robbins, ruling that the claims against them disclosed no stateable cause of action and amounted to an impermissible attempt to challenge final court orders.
In a judgment delivered on 15 August 2023, Ms Justice Eileen Roberts dismissed the claims under Order 19, rule 28 of the Rules of the Superior Courts and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction. She found them frivolous or vexatious, bound to fail and an abuse of process. The ruling addressed the State defendants only; the judgment does not dismiss the claims against the other defendants.
Carthy’s proceedings, issued in April 2022, sought damages and other relief over a possession order made in 2017 concerning a mortgaged property in Paulstown, County Kilkenny. He alleged misrepresentation, deceit and breach of rights, including that a valuation certificate signed by Robbins had been used to mislead the Circuit Court about its jurisdiction. Those were the plaintiff’s allegations, not findings of fraud by the High Court.
The judge said the pleadings did not give adequate particulars of alleged fraud against Ireland or the Attorney General. She considered that the allegation concerning Robbins might be capable of further particularisation. However, even assuming the certificate was incorrect or fraudulent, she found that it would not have affected the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction or justified setting aside its orders.
The judgment identified several independent bases for that jurisdiction, including the law on possession proceedings involving a mortgagor’s principal private residence, the property’s market value, and the position where property had no rateable valuation. The Circuit Court had already considered and rejected the jurisdiction challenge, and its relevant decisions were not overturned on appeal. The High Court said the issues were res judicata.
The judge also found no basis for holding the State defendants liable in damages for the outcome of the earlier proceedings. She said the current case could not be used as a collateral attack on those final orders. She rejected Carthy’s arguments that trusts he claimed to have created changed his contractual obligations or made the property immune from possession orders.
The court listed the matter for 3 October 2023 to address any issues arising from the judgment, including legal costs. The judgment does not state the outcome of that later listing.