High Court refuses an application for interlocutory injunctive relief as against a receiver seeking to take possession of lands that had been used for commercial development, on the grounds that the applicants delayed for four years in bringing the application, and that there was no issue to be tried.
Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief as against the defendant, who was appointed under a deed of appointment of receiver dated 13th June, 2013, over a number of secured properties set out in the schedule to that deed - defendant was informally put on notice and he undertook not to proceed with the proposed auction and/or disposal of the properties the subject matter of the proceedings pending the issuance and determination of the application for injunctive relief - plaintiffs did not issue the notice of motion for interlocutory relief for two and a half months - plaintiffs contend that there is a fair issue to be tried at the hearing of the within proceedings - they rely on the existence of a complaint made to the Financial Service Ombudsman in June, 2012 - a period in excess of four years has elapsed since the appointment of the receiver, with no steps taken by the plaintiffs in the intervening period - on the basis of delay, the plaintiffs could not have succeeded - paperwork before the Court is incomplete - issues raised in the ombudsman complaint have been set out with sufficient clarity for the Court to make a determination on their merits or their impact on the application for interlocutory relief - plaintiffs raised arguments of undue influence - plaintiffs have not set out why the exercise of the receivers powers would be invalid - no fault in the appointment of the receiver - lands in question were used for the development of holiday homes - the properties the subject matter of the receivership do not impact and/or affect the plaintiffs’ family home - properties are commercial, business and/or investment properties - application refused.