The Irish Aviation Authority & Anor. v Monks & Anor [2019] IECA 309 (17 December 2019)

The Irish Aviation Authority & Anor. v Monks & Anor [2019] IECA 309 (17 December 2019)

The High Court was entitled to strike out the New Proceedings as vexatious, bound to fail, and an abuse of process, and to grant an extended Isaac Wunder order restraining the appellant from issuing further proceedings regarding the scheduled lands without leave, as all relevant issues had been previously determined or settled, and the appellant's conduct constituted persistent and oppressive litigation. The absence of a specific notice of motion for the extended order did not result in unfairness or prejudice, as the appellant had full opportunity to argue his case.

Citation
[2019] IECA 309
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: UDARAS EITLIOCHTA NA hEIREANN THE IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY; Plaintiff/respondent: daa PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY; Defendant/appellant: GERARD MONKS; Defendant/appellant: MARK MONKS
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigation, Isaac Wunder Orders, Lis Pendens, Adverse Possession, Injunctions, Abuse of Process, Access to Courts
Civil Procedure Property Law Vexatious Litigation Isaac Wunder Orders Lis Pendens Adverse Possession Injunctions Abuse of Process +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

UDARAS EITLIOCHTA NA hEIREANN THE IRISH AVIATION AUTHORITY

Plaintiff/respondent

daa PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY

Plaintiff/respondent

GERARD MONKS

Defendant/appellant

MARK MONKS

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was correct to strike out the New Proceedings as vexatious, bound to fail, and an abuse of process.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court was correct to grant an Isaac Wunder order restraining the appellant from issuing further proceedings without leave of the court.
  3. 3 Whether fair procedures were followed in making an extended Isaac Wunder order without a specific notice of motion.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court was entitled to strike out the New Proceedings as vexatious, bound to fail, and an abuse of process, and to grant an extended Isaac Wunder order restraining the appellant from issuing further proceedings regarding the scheduled lands without leave, as all relevant issues had been previously determined or settled, and the appellant's conduct constituted persistent and oppressive litigation. The absence of a specific notice of motion for the extended order did not result in unfairness or prejudice, as the appellant had full opportunity to argue his case.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Affirmation of High Court order striking out New Proceedings as vexatious and bound to fail
  • Affirmation of Isaac Wunder order restraining appellant from issuing further proceedings regarding the scheduled lands without leave of court