The High Court has restored a €49,440 default judgment obtained by Fingal County Council against ILG Limited for unpaid rates, setting aside a later Circuit Court order that had reopened the case subject to payment conditions.
Mr Justice Max Barrett ruled on 20 June 2018 that ILG’s application to set aside the default judgment did not meet the requirements of the Circuit Court Rules. The judgment was entered on 14 February 2017 after ILG failed to deliver a defence.
The council had issued a rates bill in January 2016 and warned ILG’s solicitors in July that legal proceedings would follow if arrears were not paid. After a summons was served in November 2016, ILG sought and received consent to enter an appearance late. The council then asked for a defence and warned it would seek judgment if none was delivered by 16 January 2017. The default judgment followed in February.
Six days later, ILG’s solicitors raised a possible defence under European Union law, referring to separate proceedings involving another matter. The High Court noted that a defence in those proceedings dated from June 2013, but said ILG had not explained why it failed to mention that position or file a timely defence before judgment was entered.
The Circuit Court later granted ILG’s application to set aside the judgment, on condition that it lodge €49,440 and any further rates liabilities relating to its occupation of premises at Westmanstown, Clonsilla, Dublin 15. Both sides appealed aspects of that decision: Fingal sought to overturn the set-aside order or uphold its conditions, while ILG challenged the conditions.
The High Court did not reach an assessment of whether ILG’s proposed defence had a reasonable chance of success because, it held, the application failed an earlier procedural requirement. The rules required the motion to state clearly why no defence had been delivered. The court found that the motion, supporting affidavit and later affidavit gave no such reason.
The judge also addressed the proposed defence. ILG argued that rates amounted to State aid because Fingal provided sporting and leisure facilities similar to ILG’s. The court said the evidence that Fingal did not operate gyms analogous to ILG’s was uncontroverted, and concluded that the defence would fail on the facts.
The High Court’s order set aside the Circuit Court’s 16 November 2017 order. The judgment therefore left the 14 February 2017 default judgment in place. It did not determine any further rates liabilities or impose the later Circuit Court’s payment conditions.