The High Court has ruled that Eithne Ryan’s registered right to reside in the Bunker Hill dwelling, and to be supported and maintained there during her life, burdens the dwelling house only. The right, registered in 2006, takes priority over a later Bank of Ireland charge. But a €779,225.10 judgment obtained by Ryan in earlier proceedings does not form part of that registered burden or gain its priority.
The judgment concerns folio CE6759 in County Clare. The right was registered on 3 February 2006. The Bank’s charge was registered in 2010. The deed of assent that would have supported the registration could not be located, and the court said its absence was troubling. It therefore interpreted the wording of the registered entry itself.
The court rejected the Bank’s request to have Laurence Ryan’s will construed, finding it was not entitled to bring a construction suit on these facts. It concluded that the folio entry—“the right of Eithne Ryan to reside in the dwelling house and be suitably supported and maintained therein during her life”—covered the dwelling only. The judge said the Bank would need to establish actual mistake or fraud before seeking rectification of the register, but, having interpreted the entry as the Bank contended, found no need to consider rectification.
Ryan had secured the €779,225.10 judgment against her son, Bryan Ryan, in 2016. That award followed an assessment in earlier proceedings, where evidence put the value of past support and maintenance and necessary property works and repairs at that amount. The High Court held the award did not attach to the 2006 registered right. Any later registration against the folio would take priority from its own registration date. Enforcement of the earlier judgment against Bryan Ryan was left to those acting for Ryan.
The court noted that Ryan continued to live in the house and that no relief had been sought against its registered owner, Bryan Ryan, in these proceedings. The dispute before it concerned the extent and priority of registered burdens, not enforcement of her residence and support rights against him.
The judge declined the declarations Ryan sought about the judgment sum and the extent of the burden. The Bank’s counterclaim was granted in the terms of paragraph 2, which sought declarations that the right and registered burden applied only to the dwelling house. The judgment also appointed Gerard Reidy as Ryan’s next friend and guardian ad litem for the counterclaim. The court reserved the form of any further orders, including costs, for later consideration.