Judgment: 2026-06-22 · Court archive

High Court orders James Buckley committed to Mountjoy unless he leaves Kildare property

High Court · [2026] IEHC 410

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Caroline Teltsch
  • James Buckley
  • Paula Buckley
  • Mr Justice Brian Cregan
  • Mr Justice Kennedy
What

High Court orders James Buckley committed to Mountjoy unless he leaves Kildare property

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • High Court
  • County Kildare
  • Mountjoy Prison
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Brian Cregan found Buckley in contempt of court over his continuing refusal to comply with an order made by Mr Justice Kennedy in July 2024. The committal order was stayed for 14 days, giving Buckley until July 6th, 2026 to leave before it takes effect.

By Eoin Marsh

The High Court has ordered James Buckley to be committed to Mountjoy Prison unless he leaves County Kildare property which he has repeatedly been ordered to surrender to Caroline Teltsch.

Mr Justice Brian Cregan found Buckley in contempt of court over his continuing refusal to comply with an order made by Mr Justice Kennedy in July 2024. The committal order was stayed for 14 days, giving Buckley until July 6th, 2026 to leave before it takes effect.

The underlying proceedings concerned financial dealings between Teltsch and the Buckleys connected with a proposed equestrian business. After an uncontested High Court hearing in July 2024, Kennedy J. declared that Buckley held lands contained in three County Kildare folios on trust for Teltsch and ordered him to deliver possession to her. The court also entered substantial money judgments against James and Paula Buckley.

The possession order was personally served on James Buckley in September 2024. According to the present judgment, he remained on the property and continued operating a livery business there.

Cregan J. first found him in contempt in January 2025 but delayed committal so Buckley could pursue appeals. The Court of Appeal later rejected his challenge, including arguments that he had not known of the original hearing and that the property included his family home. The Supreme Court refused leave to appeal in April 2026.

Buckley was then given further deadlines to leave, including May 14th and June 17th. He remained in possession. On June 17th, the judge asked whether he would undertake to vacate the property. Buckley refused.

The court also rejected later attempts by both James and Paula Buckley to reopen or stay the possession order as abuses of process. Paula Buckley has separately filed an application seeking additional time to appeal, which remains for the Court of Appeal to determine.

The present ruling settles James Buckley's contempt application only. It does not determine Paula Buckley's pending appeal application or separate issues concerning other occupants of the property.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review