The Court of Appeal has dismissed two appeals by Gordon Smith and Linda Hussey arising from a long-running mortgage possession dispute over 37 Hamlet Avenue, Chieftains Way, Balbriggan.
In a judgment delivered on 11 May 2026, Mr Justice Allen held that the pair could not use later High Court proceedings to reopen the validity of a Circuit Court possession order made in 2016.
Smith borrowed €200,000 from IIB Homeloans Limited in 2005 to buy the Balbriggan property, with repayment secured by a registered charge. After he defaulted, KBC Bank Ireland obtained a Circuit Court possession order on 29 April 2016.
The order was executed by the Dublin County sheriff on 26 February 2018. Later that day, people including co-defendant Ben Gilroy re-entered the property and Smith and Hussey were restored to occupation. KBC then began High Court proceedings and obtained urgent orders requiring the occupants to leave. Possession was recovered and the property was sold in January 2019.
The later dispute focused on whether Smith and Hussey could defend the High Court action by challenging KBC's entitlement to the earlier possession order. Their arguments included claims concerning securitisation of the mortgage, the transfer of KBC's business, alleged fraud and the description of Hussey's marital status.
The Court of Appeal held that these arguments amounted to an impermissible collateral attack on a final court order. Smith had been entitled to appeal the Circuit Court possession order but did not do so. A later judicial review challenge also failed.
The court separately upheld a High Court ruling that KBC Bank NV had automatically replaced KBC Bank Ireland plc in the proceedings following an approved transfer of its business.
Mr Justice Allen said any attempt to set aside a judgment for fraud would require separate proceedings properly pleading and strictly proving deliberate dishonesty that fundamentally affected the judgment. Bare allegations in a defence were not enough.
Both appeals were dismissed and the High Court orders affirmed. KBC was presumptively entitled to its appeal costs, subject to further written submissions.