Ffrench O'Carroll v Permanent TSB plc & ors [2018] IEHC 794 (18 December 2018)

Ffrench O'Carroll v Permanent TSB plc & ors [2018] IEHC 794 (18 December 2018)

On the proper construction of the March 2008 mortgage, the security became immediately enforceable upon default without the need for a letter of demand, and the bank was contractually entitled to appoint a receiver once such default occurred.

Citation
[2018] IEHC 794
Parties
Plaintiff: Arthur Ffrench O'Carroll; Defendant: Permanent TSB plc; Defendant: Keith Lowe; Defendant: Stephen Tennant; Defendant: Havbell DAC; Defendant: Tom O'Brien; Plaintiff in Counterclaim: Havbell DAC; Plaintiff in Counterclaim: Tom O'Brien; Defendant to Counterclaim: Arthur Ffrench O'Carroll; Defendant to Counterclaim: Christine Ffrench O'Carroll
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Special Case (order 34 Rsc) / Judgment on Questions of Law
Outcome
Judgment for Permanent TSB plc; questions answered in favour of the bank.
Legal Topics
Appointment of Receiver, Mortgage Enforcement, Demand Letters, Interpretation of Mortgage Contracts
Banking Law Property Law Contract Law Appointment of Receiver Mortgage Enforcement Demand Letters Interpretation of Mortgage Contracts

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arthur Ffrench O'Carroll

Plaintiff

Permanent TSB plc

Defendant

Keith Lowe

Defendant

Stephen Tennant

Defendant

Havbell DAC

Defendant

Tom O'Brien

Defendant

Havbell DAC

Plaintiff in Counterclaim

Tom O'Brien

Plaintiff in Counterclaim

Arthur Ffrench O'Carroll

Defendant to Counterclaim

Christine Ffrench O'Carroll

Defendant to Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Special Case (order 34 Rsc) / Judgment on Questions of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a valid letter of demand was required before appointing a receiver under the March 2008 mortgage
  2. 2 Whether the bank was entitled to appoint a receiver without prior demand
  3. 3 Interpretation of contractual clauses regarding enforceability and appointment of receiver

Ratio Decidendi

On the proper construction of the March 2008 mortgage, the security became immediately enforceable upon default without the need for a letter of demand, and the bank was contractually entitled to appoint a receiver once such default occurred.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Permanent TSB plc; questions answered in favour of the bank.

Orders

  • No letter of demand was required before appointing a receiver under the March 2008 mortgage.
  • The bank had a contractual right to appoint a receiver upon default.