Moloney v Sheehy (Approved) [2026] IEHC 91 (17 February 2026)

Moloney v Sheehy (Approved) [2026] IEHC 91 (17 February 2026)

A party who has consented to a court order is bound to comply with it, even if the consent was given under a mistake, unless and until the order is set aside. Non-compliance cannot be justified by unilateral claims of mistake or immaterial changes to the underlying agreement.

Citation
[2026] IEHC 91
Parties
Plaintiff: Brian Moloney; Defendant / Plaintiff to Counterclaim: Andrew Sheehy; Defendant to Counterclaim: Noel Tynan
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Mandatory Injunction at High Court
Outcome
mandatory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Mandatory Injunction, Compliance With Court Orders, Mistake in Consent Orders, Share Purchase Agreement, Settlement of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Contract Law Mandatory Injunction Compliance With Court Orders Mistake in Consent Orders Share Purchase Agreement Settlement of Proceedings

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Moloney

Plaintiff

Andrew Sheehy

Defendant / Plaintiff to Counterclaim

Noel Tynan

Defendant to Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Mandatory Injunction at High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Sheehy is legally obliged to sign the SPA pursuant to a court order to which he consented
  2. 2 Whether a mistake in consenting to a court order justifies non-compliance
  3. 3 Whether changes to the SPA constitute a material alteration excusing non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

A party who has consented to a court order is bound to comply with it, even if the consent was given under a mistake, unless and until the order is set aside. Non-compliance cannot be justified by unilateral claims of mistake or immaterial changes to the underlying agreement.

Court Disposition

mandatory injunction granted

Orders

  • Mr. Sheehy is ordered to execute the SPA in accordance with the court order of 20 November 2025
  • Costs awarded against Mr. Sheehy in favour of Mr. Tynan