The High Court has upheld a Circuit Court order for possession of a man’s principal private residence in a mortgage case brought by Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC. Ms Justice Siobhán Phelan ruled on 10 July 2025 that the lender had established ownership of the registered charge and that its right to possession had become exercisable.
The ruling followed a de novo appeal against the Circuit Court’s 23 July 2024 order, which had included a three-month stay of execution. The High Court heard the appeal in Waterford on 25 June 2025. The possession proceedings had begun in 2017.
The defendant argued that the mortgage was only equitable, rather than a legal charge capable of supporting summary possession, and that the lender’s account statements were inadmissible hearsay and did not adequately establish default. He also sought to rely on fresh evidence and asked for an adjournment to pursue rectification of the land register or a plenary hearing.
The judge treated the material described as fresh evidence as legal arguments based on the existing record. She said the defendant could make those arguments on the de novo appeal and considered the material; she did not exclude it for want of leave.
The court found that the mortgage charge was registered in Pepper’s name and that the register was conclusive of its ownership for the purposes of the summary possession application. The judge said no rectification application had been brought and found no proper basis to adjourn so one could be pursued. She also found that the evidence did not establish an arguable challenge to the mortgage’s effectiveness.
On default, the judge noted that the defendant had not disputed the lender’s evidence that no payments had been made since 2012. She held that the possession application required proof of default, not calculation of a precise monetary judgment, and rejected the argument that the account statements failed to establish an arguable defence. The ruling recorded that, as of 5 June 2024, arrears were stated to be €113,845.83 and total outstanding debt €239,938.57.
The High Court concluded that Pepper had proved its entitlement to possession and that no credible defence had been advanced. The judge’s preliminary view was that Pepper should receive costs in both courts, but she invited submissions on any alternative costs order. The case was listed for mention after 14 days from electronic delivery for final orders and their terms, unless agreed and communicated to the registrar. The ruling therefore left costs and final-order terms for that subsequent step.