The High Court has ruled that Dublin City Council is entitled to possession of a derelict house at 18 Cadogan Road, Fairview, so it can repair the property and add it to its social housing stock.
Several people experiencing or at risk of homelessness had moved into the property during 2023. The council had already placed the house on the Derelict Sites Register in July 2022 and began the compulsory purchase process in October 2023.
The occupiers objected, arguing that they had improved the property and intended to work towards acquiring it through adverse possession. An Bord Pleanála rejected their objections in July 2024 and the property vested in Dublin City Council on August 22, 2024.
Two occupiers, Kat Iremonger and Alexander Ene, contested the council's possession proceedings at trial. They argued that the compulsory purchase was invalid because statutory notice had not been properly served and that removing them would disproportionately interfere with their rights to their home.
Mr Justice Liam Kennedy agreed on one procedural point. Iremonger was an “occupier” entitled to individual notice under the Derelict Sites Act 1990, and the council's notice addressed generally to occupants did not satisfy that requirement. The council also had not made reasonable enquiries to identify the occupiers.
However, the judge held that this defect did not invalidate the acquisition. Iremonger had actual notice, lodged an objection and participated in the statutory process without raising the service issue. The occupiers also did not challenge the resulting vesting order by judicial review.
The court separately considered their constitutional and European Convention rights because the property had become their dwelling. It found eviction proportionate. The council owns the property, needs to remedy its worsening condition and intends to use it for urgently needed social housing. The occupiers' personal difficulties were acknowledged, but could not justify retaining public housing outside the council's allocation system.
The council was therefore entitled to possession and presumptively to its costs.