C.M -v- A.M [2013] IEHC 636 (22 February 2013)
The payment to the Credit Union was a reviewable disposition under section 35 of the Family Law Act 1995 because the third party had sufficient notice of the court order and the proceedings, and thus could not be said to have acted without notice of an intention to defeat a claim for relief.
- Citation
- [2013] IEHC 636
- Parties
- Applicant: C. M.; Respondent: A. M.; Third Party: Dunboyne and District Credit Union
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 22 February 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Family Law Application / Post Interlocutory, Submissions on Reviewable Disposition
- Outcome
- Order for reversal of payment; funds to be placed on joint deposit.
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Separation, Reviewable Disposition, Family Home, Matrimonial Assets, Section 35 Family Law Act 1995
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
C. M.
Applicant
A. M.
Respondent
Dunboyne and District Credit Union
Third Party
Procedural Posture
Family Law Application / Post Interlocutory, Submissions on Reviewable Disposition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the payment of €51,386.55 by the respondent to Dunboyne and District Credit Union was a reviewable disposition under section 35 of the Family Law Act 1995
- 2 Whether the third party (Credit Union) acted in good faith and without notice of intention to defeat a claim for relief
Ratio Decidendi
The payment to the Credit Union was a reviewable disposition under section 35 of the Family Law Act 1995 because the third party had sufficient notice of the court order and the proceedings, and thus could not be said to have acted without notice of an intention to defeat a claim for relief.
Court Disposition
Order for reversal of payment; funds to be placed on joint deposit.
Orders
- The third party (Dunboyne and District Credit Union) is directed to place the sum of €51,386.55 on joint deposit in the names of Gore & Grimes, Solicitors for the applicant, and Carney McCarthy & Co., Solicitors for the respondent.
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