The High Court has allowed Paul and Sharon Meredith’s appeal against a Circuit Court possession order sought by Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC, finding that the lender had not established its entitlement to summary relief on the evidence presented. The proceedings will be remitted for a plenary hearing, where the parties can present admissible evidence. The court did not decide the underlying case or find that the defendants had a full defence.
The appeal was heard de novo, but the High Court was confined to evidence put before the Circuit Court. No application was made to introduce further evidence. Mr Justice Barry O’Donnell said the appeal concerned the possession order made on 21 February 2024; the defendants did not pursue their appeal against an earlier adjournment.
Pepper sought possession of 77 Ferrycarraig Road, Coolock, Dublin 5, under section 62(7) of the Registration of Title Act 1964. The defendants had drawn down a €200,000 loan in August 2007, secured by a registered charge. They did not dispute that they were parties to the loan and charge or that repayments had fallen into default. The judgment recorded arrears exceeding €75,000 in April 2022 and a claimed balance of €229,047.95 in October 2022.
The first defendant questioned whether Pepper was entitled to the underlying debt, saying he believed the mortgage had been sold and that he had not been notified of an assignment. His evidence on possible transactions was limited and speculative, the judge said. But correspondence showed that Pepper had not substantively answered his request for clarification, and the company filed no reply to his affidavits.
The judge distinguished the case from earlier decisions cited by the parties. Evidence from other proceedings could not establish what transactions occurred in this case. But the court could consider that Pepper had provided transaction evidence in other cases and chose not to address the issue raised here. The relevant information was in Pepper’s control, and the judge considered that it should have clarified the nature of the transactions.
The court was not satisfied that the proofs required for summary possession had been made. It did not conclude that Pepper lacked ownership of the registered charge, or that the defendants had established a final defence. The matter is to proceed to a plenary hearing under Order 5B of the Circuit Court Rules. The appeal was listed for final orders on 27 February 2025.