Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court allows appeal of Circuit Court order and grants order for possession of family home arising from the defendants' default of mortgage repayment obligations; and the court finds that despite the holder of the beneficial interest in the defendants' loan not being named as co-plaintiff with the actual plaintiff (the assignor and retainer of the legal interest), following a subsequent sale of the loan, there is no risk that the defendants will be the subject of more than one suit where the agreement to assign their loan was deliberately structured in such a way as to enable the plaintiff only to take enforcement proceedings, and where the defendants were never put on notice of the assignment or securitisation of the debt.
Appeal - application for order for possession of family home - arrears of mortgage payments - subsequent renaming of plaintiff company - defendant's loan securitised to a third party - whether effect of securitisation transaction disentitled the plaintiff to any interest in the loan or to issue these proceedings to enforce security - plaintiff retained legal estate - whether proceedings require purchaser of loan to be added as co-plaintiff or whether it must be made clear by plaintiff that it is issuing proceedings as bare trustee of purchaser - whether it is necessary so that the defendant may know the identity of the party who is legally entitled to receive repayment of the loan - risk of double repayment - whether proceedings structured improperly and should be dismissed - issue is a substantive one and not merely procedural - authorities unclear on specific point - notice - defendant not on notice of assignment of beneficial interest by plaintiff, therefore assignee cannot make any claim against defendants - deliberately structured arrangements enabling plaintiff to seek enforcement - risk that borrower will be subject to more than one suit on the same debt is illusory - no obligation to join equitable assignee - appeal allowed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now