A. O'Gorman & Co. Ltd. v. Jes Holdings Ltd. [2005] IEHC 168 (31 May 2005)

A. O'Gorman & Co. Ltd. v. Jes Holdings Ltd. [2005] IEHC 168 (31 May 2005)

The Court held that the tenant satisfied the statutory requirements to acquire the fee simple: the unbuilt land was ancillary and subsidiary; the original identity of the building was lost due to substantial alterations and change of use; retrospective consent was obtained for most works and it would be unreasonable to deny relief for later works; and the landlord failed to rebut the statutory presumption that the buildings were not erected by the lessor or predecessor. The tenant is entitled to acquire the fee simple for the sum determined.

Citation
[2005] IEHC 168
Parties
Respondent/applicant (tenant): A. O'Gorman & Co. Ltd.; Appellant/respondent (landlord): JES Holdings Ltd
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal (by Way of Rehearing) From Circuit Court Order / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Circuit Court order affirmed with variation to purchase price.
Legal Topics
Acquisition of Fee Simple, Ground Rents, Leasehold Reform, Statutory Interpretation, Breach of Covenant, Retrospective Consent
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Acquisition of Fee Simple Ground Rents Leasehold Reform Statutory Interpretation Breach of Covenant Retrospective Consent

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. O'Gorman & Co. Ltd.

Respondent/applicant (tenant)

JES Holdings Ltd

Appellant/respondent (landlord)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (by Way of Rehearing) From Circuit Court Order / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenant is entitled to acquire the fee simple under the Landlord and Tenant (Ground Rents) Acts
  2. 2 Whether the land not covered by buildings is 'subsidiary and ancillary' to the buildings
  3. 3 Whether the permanent buildings are not an 'improvement' within the statutory meaning

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the tenant satisfied the statutory requirements to acquire the fee simple: the unbuilt land was ancillary and subsidiary; the original identity of the building was lost due to substantial alterations and change of use; retrospective consent was obtained for most works and it would be unreasonable to deny relief for later works; and the landlord failed to rebut the statutory presumption that the buildings were not erected by the lessor or predecessor. The tenant is entitled to acquire the fee simple for the sum determined.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Circuit Court order affirmed with variation to purchase price.

Orders

  • Tenant entitled to acquire the fee simple in the premises.
  • Purchase price for the fee simple set at £20,000.