The High Court has ruled that the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to order possession of four separately rated properties in County Monaghan because their combined rateable valuation exceeded the Circuit Court’s €254 limit when the order was made.
In a judgment delivered on 3 July 2015, Ms Justice Baker concluded that the Circuit Court order of 23 January 2015 “must fall”. Her ruling addressed the jurisdictional question first in an appeal brought by receivers James Meagher and Adrian Trueick against Patrick Joseph, also known as P.J. Woods, and Danny Woods. Other issues in the appeal remained for consideration in light of that decision; the judgment does not resolve them.
The receivers, appointed by Ulster Bank Ireland Ltd under security instruments, had sought possession of two properties described in their Civil Bill as the “first property” and “second property”. The first comprised three separately rated units: one occupied by the Pet Shop Online, one by Midland Radio Group Ltd trading as Northern Sound Radio, and one vacant. The second was at 1 Old Cross Square, Monaghan.
The Circuit Court ordered possession of both properties and made related orders, including an order for rent to be paid to the receivers. On appeal, the first defendant argued that the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction depended on the valuation of all the land covered by the proceedings taken together. The second defendant took no part in the appeal.
The valuation certificates showed a combined rateable valuation of €265.97. The receivers argued that the court should assess each separately rated unit on its own, since each was individually below the statutory limit. Justice Baker accepted that separate valuation units can matter where proceedings seek relief over only one such unit. But here, the order covered all four units, so the land that was the subject of the proceedings had to be considered together.
The judge also rejected the argument that the Circuit Court’s jurisdiction should be assessed when proceedings began, when the combined valuation was below the limit. She held that the relevant date was when the court made its order. Nor could the High Court divide the proceedings at this late stage to create separate claims: no such application had been made before the final Circuit Court order, and the first defendant did not consent.
The High Court therefore held that the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceedings. The ruling concerns that jurisdictional issue; it does not decide the remaining appeal questions.