Appleridge Developments Ltd v Ni Ghruagain [2019] IESC 34 (23 May 2019)

Appleridge Developments Ltd v Ni Ghruagain [2019] IESC 34 (23 May 2019)

The High Court's jurisdiction in special summons proceedings is confined to the validity of registration of judgment mortgages; restoration of Appleridge to the Register retrospectively validated acts during dissolution; the appellant's challenge to the taxation of costs required judicial review, not special summons proceedings; EU law on prohibitive costs was not applicable at the relevant times.

Citation
[2019] IESC 34
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Appleridge Developments Limited; Defendant/appellant: Treasa Ní Ghruagain
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
23 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Judgment Mortgages, Restoration of Companies, Taxation of Costs, Enforcement of Judgments, Fair Procedures, EU Environmental Law
Property Law Company Law Civil Procedure Judgment Mortgages Restoration of Companies Taxation of Costs Enforcement of Judgments Fair Procedures +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appleridge Developments Limited

Plaintiff/respondent

Treasa Ní Ghruagain

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the registration of judgment mortgages was valid given the dissolution and restoration of the company
  2. 2 Whether the taxation of costs was conducted in breach of fair procedures
  3. 3 Whether EU law (not prohibitively expensive principle) applied to the costs orders

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's jurisdiction in special summons proceedings is confined to the validity of registration of judgment mortgages; restoration of Appleridge to the Register retrospectively validated acts during dissolution; the appellant's challenge to the taxation of costs required judicial review, not special summons proceedings; EU law on prohibitive costs was not applicable at the relevant times.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • No order for costs protection under EU law