Walsh -v- Property Registration Authority [2016] IECA 34 (17 February 2016)

Walsh -v- Property Registration Authority [2016] IECA 34 (17 February 2016)

The Authority was exercising routine administrative functions, not adjudicatory powers, and breached fair procedures; therefore, it is not entitled to quasi-immunity from costs and the applicant is entitled to costs.

Citation
[2016] IECA 34
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Peter Walsh; Respondent/appellant: Property Registration Authority; Notice Party: Coillte Teo.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs in Judicial Review, Quasi Judicial Immunity, Land Registration, Adverse Possession
Administrative Law Property Law Costs in Judicial Review Quasi Judicial Immunity Land Registration Adverse Possession

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Walsh

Applicant/respondent

Property Registration Authority

Respondent/appellant

Coillte Teo.

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Property Registration Authority enjoys quasi-immunity from costs in judicial review proceedings when acting in a quasi-judicial capacity
  2. 2 Whether the Authority's actions constituted adjudication or routine administration
  3. 3 Entitlement of applicant to costs after consent order quashing registration

Ratio Decidendi

The Authority was exercising routine administrative functions, not adjudicatory powers, and breached fair procedures; therefore, it is not entitled to quasi-immunity from costs and the applicant is entitled to costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Applicant awarded costs against the Property Registration Authority