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 |
The High Court has refused to dismiss a claim against receivers appointed over a plaintiff's properties, finding that the validity of their appointment and the extent of their duties remain to be fully determined. The plaintiff, representing himself, has consistently contested the receivers' appointment and accused them of mismanaging the properties. The court concluded that the plaintiff's pleadings could potentially be remedied or amended, allowing for the possibility that the receivers' duties under the principles set forth in Medforth v. Blake might be considered if the receivers' appointment is upheld. The court also noted that representations made to another judge in related proceedings precluded the defendants from seeking dismissal at this stage.
receivers, appointment validity, property management, mortgagor, High Court, Medforth v. Blake, duty of care, fiduciary duty, breach of trust, inherent jurisdiction, Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC), estoppel, abuse of process, litigation in person, strike out application, amendment of pleadings, interlocutory application, res judicata, trespass, Conveyancing Act 1881, equitable duties, mortgagee, mortgagor, equity of redemption.
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 subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now