Judgment: 2009-04-03 · Court archive

High Court rejects challenge to judgment mortgages over Limerick land dispute

High Court · [2009] IEHC 371

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Moira Barnes
  • Caroline Barnes
  • Land Registry
  • Mary Murphy
What

High Court rejects challenge to judgment mortgages over Limerick land dispute

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • County Limerick
  • High Court
  • Folio 3174F
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court found that, by October 14, 2002, the appeals had finally been disposed of and the 1997 Circuit Court order remained effective. The Murphys then had the cost orders taxed and registered judgment mortgages against the Barnes property.

The High Court has refused a challenge by Moira Barnes and Caroline Barnes to judgment mortgages registered against family land in County Limerick following years of litigation over a boundary and hedging dispute.

The proceedings concerned land in Folio 3174F, owned by Moira Barnes and her husband Thomas. The dispute began in 1991 between the Barnes family and neighbouring landowners William and Mary Murphy over hedging near their boundary and led to separate Circuit Court actions in Limerick.

In July 1997, Judge Kelly struck out the Barnes proceedings, declared that the Murphys were entitled to cut the hedge and awarded them costs. In the related Murphy proceedings, injunctions, damages and costs were granted. A series of appeals, adjournments and applications followed over several years.

The High Court found that, by October 14, 2002, the appeals had finally been disposed of and the 1997 Circuit Court order remained effective. The Murphys then had the cost orders taxed and registered judgment mortgages against the Barnes property.

The mortgages were later declared well charged by the Circuit Court. In May 2006, Judge Kenny ordered that one acre of the land be sold by public auction. It was sold for €170,000 to the highest bidder, a son of the Murphys, and the sale price was approved in January 2007. The judgment records that the sale had not been completed because of the present proceedings.

The Barnes applicants argued that the judgment mortgages lacked a valid court-order foundation because an earlier High Court order had been set aside. Mr Justice O’Neill rejected that argument, holding that subsequent proceedings had ultimately left the original orders and costs enforceable.

He also held that, once correctly completed affidavits were lodged, the Land Registry had no discretion to refuse registration of the mortgages. As their validity had not been successfully challenged in the Circuit Court enforcement proceedings, there was no basis for cancelling them.

The High Court therefore refused all relief sought by the applicants.

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