Judgment: 2025-06-05 · Court archive

High Court grants Pepper possession of Cavan property after mortgage appeal

On a de novo appeal, the court found Pepper had established its right to possession under the registered charge. The order was stayed for three months; final orders, including costs, were to be considered later.

High Court · [2025] IEHC 333

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland)
  • Martin O’Reilly (Defendant)
  • Mark Heslin (Judge)
What

On a de novo appeal, the court found Pepper had established its right to possession under the registered charge. The order was stayed for three months; final orders, including costs, were to be considered later.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Folio 858L
  • County Cavan
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 16 July 2024

    The appeal followed a Circuit Court order on 16 July 2024 that Pepper recover possession. Justice Mark Heslin said the High Court reheard Pepper’s application under section 62(7) of the Registration of Title Act 1964. That provision allows a registered charge owner to apply for possession once the secured money is due.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The judge found that Pepper was the registered owner of the charge over folio 858L, and that O’Reilly had defaulted on the loan. The court noted that he had made no repayments since 2011 and did not dispute the default or the calculation of his indebtedness. Pepper said it sought possession to facilitate a sale of the property.

The High Court has granted Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC an order for possession of a property in County Cavan after hearing a de novo appeal by Martin O’Reilly. The order is stayed for three months. The court listed the case for final orders, including costs, on 20 June 2025; the judgment does not record what was decided at that later listing.

The appeal followed a Circuit Court order on 16 July 2024 that Pepper recover possession. Justice Mark Heslin said the High Court reheard Pepper’s application under section 62(7) of the Registration of Title Act 1964. That provision allows a registered charge owner to apply for possession once the secured money is due.

The judge found that Pepper was the registered owner of the charge over folio 858L, and that O’Reilly had defaulted on the loan. The court noted that he had made no repayments since 2011 and did not dispute the default or the calculation of his indebtedness. Pepper said it sought possession to facilitate a sale of the property.

O’Reilly challenged Pepper’s entitlement on several grounds, including that there was no chain of title, that he had not consented to transfers, and that the assignment was not absolute. The judge rejected those arguments, relying on the transfer deed, written notices to O’Reilly and the Land Registry folio. The judgment said the registered ownership entry was conclusive for this application.

The judge also rejected O’Reilly’s request for discovery, finding it had no role in the summary proceedings in the circumstances. He said the case did not require a plenary hearing because O’Reilly had not raised a credible defence. A disputed account credit of €5,426.14 did not alter the default relevant to the possession claim, which was not a claim for a money judgment.

The court concluded that Pepper had made its application bona fide to realise its security and granted the relief sought. It directed O’Reilly to make immediate arrangements to leave, subject to the three-month stay. Costs remained for consideration at the later listing.

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