The High Court dismissed a tenant’s appeal against a Residential Tenancies Board determination after finding it was filed one day outside the statutory time limit. The court said it had no jurisdiction to extend that deadline, even if the tenant’s account of difficulties filing the motion was correct.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Bolger on 16 February 2023, concerned a tenancy that began in July 2013. The landlord served a termination notice in August 2015, saying the property was to be sold. The tenant left in September 2016. In a separate determination, the notice was deemed valid; another separate decision found €830 in rent arrears. The arrears determination was enforced by the Circuit Court and was not under appeal in this case.
The tenant later applied to the RTB, arguing that the landlord had not sold the property and had never intended to do so. The tenant also sought return of a €500 security deposit. An adjudicator initially ordered the landlord to pay €3,000 for unjustly depriving the tenant of possession. On appeal, however, the Tenancy Tribunal found no breach of section 56 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 and held that the landlord could retain the deposit against the unpaid arrears. It also said the landlord had a genuine intention to sell within three months of the tenancy ending, but circumstances later changed.
The tenant’s High Court motion was dated 7 February 2022 but stamped as filed on 8 February. The RTB’s determination order was dated 22 December 2021, and the RTB accepted that the 21-day deadline fell on Sunday, 6 February, making Monday, 7 February the last timely filing day. The tenant said the Central Office would not accept bank card payment, closed before the tenant returned with cash, and a court official had said the delay was not the tenant’s fault. The judge said those circumstances did not change the filing date.
Justice Bolger also considered the appeal on the assumption that it was within time. She found it identified no error of law, but instead challenged the Tribunal’s assessment of the evidence and the merits of its findings. She said the Tribunal had considered the evidence, applied the relevant law, conducted a fair hearing and given reasons.
The judge’s indicative view was that the RTB should receive its costs. She listed the matter for 2 March 2023 for final orders, including costs, and invited submissions before then. The judgment records the appeal’s failure; it does not record the final costs order.