Clydaville Investments LTD v Setanta Centre (Approved) [2021] IEHC 694 (20 October 2021)

Clydaville Investments LTD v Setanta Centre (Approved) [2021] IEHC 694 (20 October 2021)

The existence of pending High Court proceedings asserting easements and quasi property rights creates a realistic possibility that the defendant may not be able to proceed with redevelopment under its current planning permission, thus the plaintiff's claim to a new tenancy cannot be said to be bound to fail; striking out is not appropriate at this stage.

Citation
[2021] IEHC 694
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Clydaville Investments Limited; Defendant/respondent: Setanta Centre
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
20 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Circuit Appeal (landlord and Tenant) / High Court Appeal From Circuit Court, Motion to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Defendant's application to strike out plaintiff's claim refused; application for trial of preliminary issue refused.
Legal Topics
New Tenancy Entitlement, Planning Permission, Inherent Jurisdiction, Compensation for Disturbance, Easements, Summary Disposal
Property Law Landlord and Tenant Law Civil Procedure New Tenancy Entitlement Planning Permission Inherent Jurisdiction Compensation for Disturbance Easements +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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clydaville Investments Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Setanta Centre

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Circuit Appeal (landlord and Tenant) / High Court Appeal From Circuit Court, Motion to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is precluded from claiming a new tenancy under s.17(2)(a) of the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's application to strike out the claim as bound to fail should be granted
  3. 3 Effect of pending High Court proceedings on easements and quasi property rights

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of pending High Court proceedings asserting easements and quasi property rights creates a realistic possibility that the defendant may not be able to proceed with redevelopment under its current planning permission, thus the plaintiff's claim to a new tenancy cannot be said to be bound to fail; striking out is not appropriate at this stage.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to strike out plaintiff's claim refused; application for trial of preliminary issue refused.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim to a new tenancy not struck out; substantive application to proceed before Circuit Court.
  • No direction for trial of preliminary issue.