Judgment: 2022-05-20 · Court archive

High Court orders boxing club plaintiffs to clarify claims against Wicklow County Council

The court directed Bray Boxing Club Ltd. and Peter Taylor to provide particulars about alleged licences, agreements, a sports grant and claims that the council acted ultra vires.

The High Court · [2022] IEHC 297

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Bray Boxing Club
  • Peter Taylor (Plaintiff)
  • Wicklow County Council (Defendant)
  • Brian O’Moore (Judge)
What

The court directed Bray Boxing Club Ltd. and Peter Taylor to provide particulars about alleged licences, agreements, a sports grant and claims that the council acted ultra vires.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Harbour Shed
  • Bray
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 20 June 2022

    The judge listed the matter for a brief hearing on 20 June 2022 to set a deadline for providing the particulars, address the costs of the motion and deal with any other matters raised by the parties. The judgment does not record a deadline or a decision on costs.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The order followed a council motion seeking replies to a notice for further and better particulars served in September 2021. Mr Justice Brian O’Moore rejected the plaintiffs’ submissions that the council’s defence already set out its position on the premises, and that the council knew enough about their case without further particulars.

The High Court has ordered Bray Boxing Club Ltd. and Peter Taylor to provide further details of their claims against Wicklow County Council over locks changed at premises on Bray seafront in June 2018.

The order followed a council motion seeking replies to a notice for further and better particulars served in September 2021. Mr Justice Brian O’Moore rejected the plaintiffs’ submissions that the council’s defence already set out its position on the premises, and that the council knew enough about their case without further particulars.

The plaintiffs seek a range of reliefs, including injunctions, declarations and damages, in claims that include negligence, replevin and trover. The judgment addresses the particulars motion; it does not determine those underlying claims.

The council’s defence admits that a 2007 lease was granted for the Harbour Shed, west of Bray Harbour, for four years and nine months at an annual rent of €200, and says the lease expired in November 2011. It also says the boxing club was permitted to continue using the premises until they were closed for redevelopment in or about August 2013. The plaintiffs plead that a number of licences followed the lease. The judge said the alleged licences could be significant but had not been identified with enough precision, and ordered details about whether they were written or oral and, as applicable, their dates, parties and terms.

The plaintiffs must also explain why Bray Boxing Club Ltd. was said to be a tenant in 2018 and why Taylor was said to be a licensee. They must identify the leases or licences relied on from 2007 onward, the parties and dates, and the obligations allegedly breached.

The judgment also directs particulars of how the council allegedly contravened the terms and conditions of a €190,000 sports grant, and the facts and agreements relied on for claims that the council acted ultra vires and contrary to the spirit of previous agreements.

The judge listed the matter for a brief hearing on 20 June 2022 to set a deadline for providing the particulars, address the costs of the motion and deal with any other matters raised by the parties. The judgment does not record a deadline or a decision on costs.

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