The High Court has ordered Paul Coates to vacate a property at 13 Coldwater Lakes, Saggart, remove his belongings and stay away, pending the resolution of proceedings brought by two receivers. The interlocutory orders also restrain him from renting or leasing the property, or holding himself out as entitled to do so.
In a judgment delivered on 9 October 2019, Ms Justice Reynolds rejected Mr Coates’s argument that the Circuit Court had exclusive jurisdiction because the property was his principal private residence. The court found that it remained security for a commercial loan entered into in 2005, years before he said he moved into the property in 2015.
Ulster Bank advanced Mr Coates €1 million in 2005 for a stated purpose of assisting with a personal investment in a capital-guaranteed bond. The loan was secured over the Saggart property. Mr Coates defaulted, and the bank issued a demand for repayment in March 2013. The bank’s interests were transferred to Promontoria (Aran) Limited in 2016, and the receivers were appointed over the property that December.
Mr Coates maintained that the property had been his principal private residence since May 2015. He argued that section 3 of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013 required proceedings for possession of such a home to be brought in the Circuit Court. He also said the receivers had not given him an opportunity to use the Mortgage Arrears Resolution Process.
The receivers argued that the loan was for investment purposes and that the property was not Mr Coates’s family home when the loan was made. The judgment records that he then lived at the family home in Cypress Downs, Templeogue. The court noted that he continued to use that address for official dealings until 2016 and had not explained where he lived between leaving the family home in 2007 and moving to the Saggart property.
The court rejected the principal-residence argument, finding that Mr Coates could not unilaterally change the terms of the 2005 loan by moving into the secured property years later. It then considered the receivers’ request for interlocutory injunctions. The court said a strong arguable case had been made out and granted the reliefs sought in the plenary summons on an interlocutory basis.
The judgment records that Mr Coates had paid €3,000 against a liability of about €1.5 million since the proceedings began. At the end of the hearing, he agreed to pay €2,000 a month towards mortgage arrears pending resolution of the proceedings. The court expressed uncertainty about his ability to make those payments, given his stated ill-health, lack of income and other debts. The orders are interlocutory; the judgment does not determine the underlying proceedings finally.