The Supreme Court has dismissed Dublin City Council’s appeal in a dispute over a €50,153.42 derelict-sites levy, holding that the charge no longer affected property bought by Michelle Maher after the Bank of Ireland sold it under its statutory mortgage power.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Baker on 11 April 2024, concerns a property in East Wall, Dublin. Maher agreed to buy it from the Bank in June 2014. The property was vacant and derelict, and a levy demand had been served on its owner in January 2008. The unpaid levy became a statutory charge on the property.
The Bank completed the sale by deed of assignment on 30 September 2014, expressly exercising its power of sale under the Conveyancing Act 1881. Maher later paid the Council €50,153.42 under protest to facilitate a sale of the property. She began proceedings seeking repayment. The Circuit Court rejected her claim, but the High Court allowed her appeal and ordered judgment for the sum she had paid.
The Council argued that the Derelict Sites Act 1990 meant its charge remained on the land until the levy was paid, and could not be removed by a mortgagee’s sale. Maher argued that the ordinary statutory power of sale allowed the Bank to overreach later charges, leaving the Council to pursue the levy against the person liable for it.
The Supreme Court held that the 1990 Act did not clearly displace the mortgagee’s overreaching power under section 21 of the 1881 Act, now reflected in section 104 of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009. The judgment said the levy was recoverable as a simple contract debt from the former owner, but the Bank’s sale under its statutory power freed the property from the charge.
The Court also rejected the Council’s argument that the charge had special priority over prior interests. The judgment noted that the legislation did not make a mortgagee out of possession liable for the levy or provide for such a mortgagee to receive notice or challenge the levy’s valuation.
The Court dismissed the Council’s appeal, leaving the High Court judgment in Maher’s favour in place. The ruling addresses the effect of this mortgagee sale; it does not extinguish the former owner’s liability for the levy.