Assistant Examiner fell into fundamental error of law in failing to regard burden noted on Folio as conclusive ownership of the charge

Haughton J (nem diss): Appeal of a decision of the High Court refusing to cary an Examiner's Certificate - mortgages - well charging - security - extent of the functions and powers of the Examiner of the High Court (or the Assistant Examiner) in taking accounts and pursuing enquiries as to encumbrances in a mortgage suit and filing a Certificate accordingly - the jurisdiction of the High Court under Order 55, rule 50 of the Rules of the Superior Courts in hearing an application to vary or discharge an Examiner’s Certificate in “special circumstances” - the effect in both processes of s. 31 of the Registration of Title Act, 1964 which provides for the registers kept in the Land Registry to be conclusive evidence of the ownership of an interest in land - whether the trial judge erred in law and in fact in refusing to vary or discharge the Examiner’s Certificate - whether the trial judge erred in law and in fact in refusing to admit the first legal charge of appellant dated 21 October 2009 over the respondent’s interest in a Folio - whether the trial judge erred in law and in fact in permitting the Examiner’s Certificate to reflect that the respondent’s judgment mortgage should rank with priority the appellant's prior charge - sections 116 and 117 of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act, 2009 - whether the appellant could show “special circumstances” within the
meaning of that term in Order 55, rule 50 of the Rules of the Superior Courts, sufficient to justify discharge or variation of the Assistant Examiner’s Certificate - appeal allowed - certificate varied.