O'Connor -v- Mc Namara [2009] IEHC 190 (24 April 2009)
Time was not of the essence in the dissolution agreement; the plaintiff was not aware of the significance of the Achill property; both parties partially performed; the defendant is not entitled to declare the agreement null and void; the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance and a declaration of dissolution.
- Citation
- [2009] IEHC 190
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Adrian O’Connor; Defendant: Joseph McNamara
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 24 April 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Partnership Dissolution / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for plaintiff
- Legal Topics
- Partnership Dissolution, Specific Performance, Time of the Essence, Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Adrian O’Connor
Plaintiff
Joseph McNamara
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Partnership Dissolution / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Is the dissolution agreement of 4th July, 2007, valid and enforceable?
- 2 Was time of the essence in the dissolution agreement?
- 3 Is the defendant entitled to declare the agreement null and void?
Ratio Decidendi
Time was not of the essence in the dissolution agreement; the plaintiff was not aware of the significance of the Achill property; both parties partially performed; the defendant is not entitled to declare the agreement null and void; the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance and a declaration of dissolution.
Court Disposition
judgment for plaintiff
Orders
- Order for specific performance of the dissolution agreement by the defendant
- Declaration that the partnership was dissolved by the agreement of 4th July, 2007
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment