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 determines issues set down for adjudication, finding that a settlement agreement entered into between certain parties did not prevent the Official Assignee from bringing statutory proceedings, nor provide a full or partial defence to those proceedings, on the grounds that: (a) while certain parties entering the settlement agreement in question believed it would protect the family home and prevent the Official Assignee from bringing proceedings, on no reasonable interpretation of this agreement could it be construed that any of its terms acted to preclude the Official Assignee from issuing proceedings; (b) there was no basis for an estoppel acting against the Official Assignee in his institution of proceedings; and (c) in respect of the family home, there may be a full answer to the Official Assignee's claim, but that is a matter to be dealt with in those proceedings.
Motion for directions - two issues for adjudication had been set out by the High Court (Costello J) - whether settlement agreement in respect of wife acted to bar or prohibit the bringing of certain proceedings by the Official Assignee against husband or provided a full defence to said proceedings - whether settlement agreement provided a partial defence by way of credit in a certain sum - s. 74 of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 - whether settlement agreement binding on the Official Assignee - whether Official Assignee otherwise estopped.
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