The High Court has dismissed Kathleen Minnock’s proceedings against Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) DAC and Declan Taite because she did not advance her claim for more than four years. It also ordered the removal of a lis pendens affecting 140 Morehampton Road, Donnybrook, Dublin.
Mr Justice Brian O’Moore ruled on 19 May 2023 on an application by Pepper and Taite to strike out the proceedings. Minnock did not attend the motion hearing on 8 January 2023. The judge dismissed the claim against those two defendants for delay and want of prosecution. He did not decide their separate arguments that the claim was frivolous, vexatious or bound to fail.
Minnock issued the proceedings in November 2018. Her claims included beneficial ownership of the property, challenges to charges over it, orders to restrain steps to realise the security and damages. She never served the plenary summons on Pepper or Taite and did not deliver a statement of claim, despite repeated requests and extensions. The defendants’ solicitors warned that they might seek to strike out the case if it was not delivered.
The dispute followed earlier mortgage enforcement proceedings brought by ACC Bank against Niall Quinn, who is identified in the judgment as Minnock’s spouse. In April 2014, the High Court ordered Quinn to give up possession of the property. The judgment records that Minnock had been notified of those proceedings and had an opportunity to seek joinder, but did not do so. Quinn’s appeal was dismissed in 2018, and the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal in 2019. Pepper was substituted for ACC as a defendant in Minnock’s proceedings in December 2021.
Justice O’Moore found Minnock’s delay inordinate and inexcusable, with no explanation offered. He concluded that the balance of justice favoured dismissal because the ongoing proceedings prejudiced Pepper and Taite. He said the lis pendens could also be vacated because Minnock had not prosecuted her claim expeditiously; the judge said she had not prosecuted it at all. Although the defendants had sought that order under section 123 of the Land and Conveyancing (Law Reform) Act 2009, the judgment does not determine their other strike-out grounds.
The judge’s initial view was that Pepper and Taite should receive their costs, but he described this as provisional. The matter was listed for mention on 21 June 2023 to address costs and any other outstanding issues.