Judgment: 2011-06-07 · Court archive

Supreme Court allows appeal over Kilkenny property held through company

The Court found that the company and Mary Kieran held Brownsbarn House, company shares and a second parcel of land on resulting trust for James Stanley, reversing the High Court’s dismissal of his claim.

Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • James Stanley (Plaintiff)
  • River Properties Limited (Defendant)
What

The Court found that the company and Mary Kieran held Brownsbarn House, company shares and a second parcel of land on resulting trust for James Stanley, reversing the High Court’s dismissal of his claim.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Brownsbarn House
  • Folio 18341F
  • County Kilkenny
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Supreme Court has allowed James Stanley’s appeal over the beneficial ownership of Brownsbarn House and related property in County Kilkenny, finding that the assets were held on trust for him.

The Supreme Court has allowed James Stanley’s appeal over the beneficial ownership of Brownsbarn House and related property in County Kilkenny, finding that the assets were held on trust for him.

The appeal was from a High Court order dismissing Stanley’s claim. He said he paid IR£220,000 for Brownsbarn House in 1989 and had it conveyed to River Properties Limited, whose two issued shares were later registered in Mary Kieran’s name. He also said he provided the money for a second parcel, Folio 18341F, acquired in 1999 and registered to Kieran. Kieran is also identified in the judgment as Mary Crawley.

The High Court accepted that Stanley provided the purchase money for both properties. It found this raised a presumption of resulting trust, but dismissed his claim after drawing inferences from his conduct and dealings with Kieran that it considered suggested he intended to benefit her. The Supreme Court agreed that the presumption arose and that Kieran and the company had not rebutted it.

The Court considered the High Court’s reasons for drawing adverse inferences from Stanley’s evidence. It concluded that the separate arrangement concerning another apartment did not determine his intention about Brownsbarn House; the delay in registering the company’s title did not justify an adverse inference; and the other factors, including the parties’ arrangements and a proposed settlement, did not carry sufficient weight to displace the trust presumption. The Court also noted that Stanley’s evidence had not been cross-examined and that the High Court had made no express finding that he was not credible.

Kieran’s evidence was disregarded by the High Court after she left during cross-examination. The company was not represented at the High Court hearing. The Supreme Court did not decide a new argument raised on appeal about the property rights of cohabiting partners, holding that a new case could not be introduced at that stage. It addressed the resulting-trust issue tried in the High Court.

The Supreme Court held that River Properties held Brownsbarn House on resulting trust for Stanley, that Kieran held the company shares in trust for him, and that she also held the Folio 18341F property in trust for him. It allowed the appeal. The judgment does not specify further consequential orders.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review