Larkin v Gaynor (Unapproved) [2022] IECA 224 (13 October 2022)

Larkin v Gaynor (Unapproved) [2022] IECA 224 (13 October 2022)

Mr. Gaynor exhausted all avenues to challenge the bankruptcy adjudication; the Official Assignee is the legal owner of the lands and entitled to injunctive relief against trespass and interference. No evidence was adduced by Mr. Gaynor to establish a right to trespass or interfere. Claims of prior payment, third-party interests, or procedural irregularities do not justify trespass or defeat the Official Assignee's statutory powers.

Citation
[2022] IECA 224
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Michael Ian Larkin; Defendant/appellant: John Gaynor
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Injunction Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Bankruptcy Adjudication, Vesting of Property, Interlocutory Injunction, Trespass, Power of Official Assignee, Appeal Exhaustion
Bankruptcy Property Law Civil Procedure Bankruptcy Adjudication Vesting of Property Interlocutory Injunction Trespass Power of Official Assignee +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Ian Larkin

Plaintiff/respondent

John Gaynor

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Injunction Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Official Assignee is entitled to injunctive relief restraining trespass and interference with vested lands
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Gaynor can challenge the bankruptcy adjudication order after exhausting all appeals
  3. 3 Whether claims of prior payment or third-party interests justify trespass

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Gaynor exhausted all avenues to challenge the bankruptcy adjudication; the Official Assignee is the legal owner of the lands and entitled to injunctive relief against trespass and interference. No evidence was adduced by Mr. Gaynor to establish a right to trespass or interfere. Claims of prior payment, third-party interests, or procedural irregularities do not justify trespass or defeat the Official Assignee's statutory powers.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Interlocutory injunction restraining trespass and interference with lands upheld
  • Official Assignee awarded costs unless otherwise indicated within twenty-one days