George Maloney v Paul O'Shea & Anor [2013] IEHC 354 (19 July 2013)

George Maloney v Paul O'Shea & Anor [2013] IEHC 354 (19 July 2013)

Plaintiff receiver was validly appointed and is entitled to interlocutory injunctions against defendants, as lease is void against bank due to lack of consent and technical objections are unfounded.

Citation
[2013] IEHC 354
Parties
Plaintiff: George Maloney; First Defendant: Paul O'Shea; Second Defendant: Cannon Agri Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Plenary Summons / Interlocutory Injunction Application
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Receiver's Powers, Validity of Lease Without Mortgagee Consent, Execution of Receiver Appointment, Interlocutory Relief Criteria
Property Law Banking Law Injunctions Receiver's Powers Validity of Lease Without Mortgagee Consent Execution of Receiver Appointment Interlocutory Relief Criteria

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Maloney

Plaintiff

Paul O'Shea

First Defendant

Cannon Agri Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Plenary Summons / Interlocutory Injunction Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether receiver was validly appointed over part of mortgaged property
  2. 2 Whether lease granted by mortgagor without mortgagee's consent is binding on receiver
  3. 3 Entitlement of receiver to possession and injunctive relief against mortgagor and lessee

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff receiver was validly appointed and is entitled to interlocutory injunctions against defendants, as lease is void against bank due to lack of consent and technical objections are unfounded.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted

Orders

  • Defendants prohibited from impeding or obstructing plaintiff from taking possession of Receivership Property
  • Defendants prohibited from impeding or obstructing plaintiff in securing Receivership Property