Murphy v McKeown & anor (Approved) [2020] IECA 188 (13 July 2020)

Murphy v McKeown & anor (Approved) [2020] IECA 188 (13 July 2020)

The appellants' submissions do not meet the threshold for the Court to revisit its final judgment; objections regarding procedural errors and scope of submissions are misconceived; interlocutory proceedings permit hearsay evidence; costs should follow the event as appellants failed in both the High Court and appeal.

Citation
[2020] IECA 188
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Ned Murphy; Defendant/appellant: Paddy McKeown; Defendant/appellant: Adelaide McCarthy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Submissions and Final Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed; costs awarded to respondent.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Relief, Receivership, Costs, Appeal Procedure
Civil Procedure Property Law Interlocutory Relief Receivership Costs Appeal Procedure

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ned Murphy

Plaintiff/respondent

Paddy McKeown

Defendant/appellant

Adelaide McCarthy

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Post Judgment Submissions and Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether procedural and practice errors warrant revisiting the Court's final judgment
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's submissions exceeded the scope directed by the Court
  3. 3 Admissibility of hearsay evidence in interlocutory proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants' submissions do not meet the threshold for the Court to revisit its final judgment; objections regarding procedural errors and scope of submissions are misconceived; interlocutory proceedings permit hearsay evidence; costs should follow the event as appellants failed in both the High Court and appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed; costs awarded to respondent.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Order of High Court perfected on 16 November 2017 affirmed