The High Court struck out Angela Oman’s claim against Allied Irish Banks plc and receiver Stephen Tennant concerning premises at 114–116 Capel Street, Dublin, and ordered that a lis pendens registered against the premises be vacated.
In an ex tempore judgment delivered on 13 June 2018, Mr Justice Tony O’Connor found that Oman had not established an arguable equitable interest capable of defeating the bank’s rights. He also said that, even if she had an arguable claim, it would be defeated by acquiescence and delay.
Oman’s proceedings, begun by plenary summons on 11 May 2018, sought a declaration that she had a beneficial interest in the premises. Her other claims included that a 2004 mortgage was void, damages for alleged slander of title, and orders concerning the receiver’s appointment and disposal of the property. The bank and receiver applied to strike out the proceedings and to have the lis pendens removed.
The court had previously made a possession order against Oman’s husband, James Oman, in separate proceedings on 21 November 2017, following an agreement to give up possession with execution stayed until 1 June 2018. Justice O’Connor noted that Angela Oman did not deny knowing about those proceedings or the consent order. She began her own case about three weeks before the stay expired.
The judge considered the plaintiff’s claim at its highest, as required on a strike-out application. He accepted the defendants’ submission that her account of a joint venture and the transfer of a previous business into her husband’s sole trading business could not create an enforceable equitable interest against the bank’s mortgage. He also found no legal basis for the argument that the bank had to inspect the premises or inquire about unregistered joint venturers. The judgment records that, when the mortgage was made in 2004, Oman lived with her husband and family in Belgrave Square, Rathmines, and had not notified AIB of the claimed interest before a letter in October 2017.
The order struck out the claim against AIB and the receiver. The judgment did not strike out the claim against James Oman. It separately vacated the lis pendens, reasoning that after the strike-out there was no bona fide reason to continue the proceedings against him in respect of premises in which he no longer had an interest.