Fergus Lowe -v- Gerard Burns & Anor [2012] IEHC 162 (17 April 2012)

Fergus Lowe -v- Gerard Burns & Anor [2012] IEHC 162 (17 April 2012)

The receiver was validly appointed under the security documents and entitled to possession and rents. Defendants cannot dismiss or instruct the receiver. Plaintiff met all tests for interlocutory injunction; evidence showed interference, harassment, and inability of defendants to pay damages. Injunction is warranted pending substantive proceedings.

Citation
[2012] IEHC 162
Parties
Plaintiff: Fergus Lowe; First Defendant: Gerard Burns; Second Defendant: Anne Burns
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Plenary Summons / Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted and continued until determination of substantive proceedings or further order.
Legal Topics
Receiver Appointment, Mortgage Enforcement, Interlocutory Injunctions, Duty of Care, Agency Relationship
Property Law Banking Law Civil Procedure Receiver Appointment Mortgage Enforcement Interlocutory Injunctions Duty of Care Agency Relationship

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fergus Lowe

Plaintiff

Gerard Burns

First Defendant

Anne Burns

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Plenary Summons / Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the receiver was validly appointed and entitled to possession and rents of the mortgaged properties
  2. 2 Whether the defendants can dismiss or instruct the receiver
  3. 3 Whether interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain interference, harassment, and unauthorised entry

Ratio Decidendi

The receiver was validly appointed under the security documents and entitled to possession and rents. Defendants cannot dismiss or instruct the receiver. Plaintiff met all tests for interlocutory injunction; evidence showed interference, harassment, and inability of defendants to pay damages. Injunction is warranted pending substantive proceedings.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted and continued until determination of substantive proceedings or further order.

Orders

  • Defendants and associates restrained from interfering with receiver's activities, harassing or intimidating occupants, or entering properties without receiver's consent.