The High Court dismissed motions by Jim Egan seeking the attachment and committal of Ennis Property Finance DAC and two co-defendants, and rejected his application to have a legal issue tried separately before the main trial. The ruling did not determine the underlying fraud allegations or decide the discovery dispute.
High Court rejects contempt and preliminary-issue motions in Ennis property dispute
The interlocutory ruling found no court-order obligation requiring Ennis or the Caseys to pay or facilitate a €6,000 monthly licence fee. A discovery dispute remained unresolved.
Who, what, where, when and why
- Who
- Ennis Property Finance DAC
- Jim Egan (Defendant)
- What
The interlocutory ruling found no court-order obligation requiring Ennis or the Caseys to pay or facilitate a €6,000 monthly licence fee. A discovery dispute remained unresolved.
- Where
No place detail is included in this summary.
- When
Judgment:
- Why
Reasons reported in the judgment
The High Court dismissed motions by Jim Egan seeking the attachment and committal of Ennis Property Finance DAC and two co-defendants, and rejected his application to have a legal issue tried separately before the main trial. The ruling did not determine the underlying fraud allegations or decide the discovery dispute.
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.