The Court of Appeal has refused Monica Molloy more time to appeal a High Court order charging lands registered in her name against a €119,000 debt to St. Canices’s Kilkenny Credit Union Limited.
In a judgment delivered on 2 February 2015, Mr Justice Kelly said Ms Molloy had not met the tests for an extension of time. Justices Irvine and Hogan agreed. The court dismissed the application; it did not decide the appeal itself or determine ownership of any beneficial interest in the lands.
The credit union had obtained judgment against Ms Molloy for €119,000 and converted it into a judgment mortgage. On 7 October 2013, Ms Justice Dunne made an order declaring the debt well charged on Ms Molloy’s interest in the lands. The order provided for sale in default of payment, subject to conditions to be settled by the court, and directed the High Court Examiner to conduct accounts and inquiries, including on encumbrances and priorities. Those inquiries were under way.
The Court of Appeal applied three considerations from Eire Continental Trading Company v Clonmel Foods: whether an intention to appeal was formed within time, whether a mistake explained the delay, and whether there was an arguable appeal ground. Mr Justice Kelly found that Ms Molloy had not shown an arguable ground. He said the 2013 order had not decided whether the lands were a family home or whether the credit union’s debt was owed. The debt judgment predated that order, and Ms Molloy did not deny owing the money. The interest provision reflected the statutory consequence of judgment, while the order secured the debt against lands in which she was the registered owner.
Mr Justice Kelly also said Ms Molloy’s account did not establish a timely intention to appeal or an appropriate mistake explaining the delay. She said she had learned of her right to appeal only much later and that instructions to her family solicitor to transfer part of the lands to her parents had not been carried out.
The judgment said any parental interest in the folio could be examined by the High Court Examiner, either in the current proceedings or in proceedings concerning the parents’ own debts. The credit union had judgments exceeding €100,000 against each parent and judgment mortgages over whatever interests they might have in the folio. The court expressed concern that Ms Molloy’s debt should not be discharged by selling property that was not hers, but made no finding that her parents owned any part of the lands. It said their possible interest was likely to be affected by their own judgments and left the issue for the Examiner’s inquiries.