No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

Register Now
Wednesday, 5th November, 2025

Tenant refused injunction to regain offices after failure to pay rent

By: Decisis
The High Court refused an application by a tenant company for an interlocutory injunction requiring joint receivers to return possession of three office properties following re-entry for non-payment of rent totalling over €3 million. The court found that the leases, executed by the same individual for both landlord and tenant, clearly set out the rent due and rejected the tenant’s novel arguments—including claims that 'rent equals interest', alleged unconscionable pressure to increase rent, insufficient notice of repossession, and misappropriation of business by the receivers—as lacking credible evidence or legal merit. The court held that there was no fair issue to be tried, and in any event, the balance of justice weighed heavily against granting the injunction, especially since the tenant failed to offer full payment of the arrears or a commitment to meet future rent, and had a precarious financial position. The relief sought was also mandatory, which the tenant had not established a strong case to justify.

Personal injury claim against airline dismissed due to plaintiff’s prolonged and unexplained delay

By: Decisis
The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's personal injury claim against an airline on grounds of inordinate and inexcusable delay, with more than seven years of inactivity attributable to the plaintiff. The court found the plaintiff failed to advance the proceedings for extended periods, including not responding to requests for particulars and not progressing discovery, despite repeated efforts by the defendants to prompt action. No exceptional justification was offered for the delay, and the plaintiff’s solicitors conceded they had no instructions from their client for several years. The dismissal reflects the court's emphasis on the prejudice caused by the passage of time—especially for a case dependent on oral evidence regarding events that occurred fifteen years ago—and the absence of any 'pressing exigency of justice' to allow the matter to proceed.

Distribution of liquidated company funds halted pending inquiry into claims from other defrauded parties

By: Decisis
The High Court refused an application by liquidators for an order permitting a court-appointed receiver to pay out funds recovered from a defendant, formerly a liquidator removed for wrongdoing, to the plaintiffs for the benefit of company shareholders, save for agreed costs and expenses. The court held that the receiver must first consider any 'just claims' from other innocent parties who may also have been defrauded by the defendant and may have a proprietary interest in the funds before making any distribution. The decision emphasised the plain meaning of the consent order and the risk of injustice to other victims if their potential claims were ignored, concluding that distribution should not be confined solely to the plaintiffs without proper inquiry into competing claims.

The only fast reporting service for all Irish judgments over the past ten years. Click here to request a subscription.

Register Now