Ewins v Promontoria Scariff Designated Activity Company & Anor (Approved) [2024] IEHC 556 (20 September 2024)

Ewins v Promontoria Scariff Designated Activity Company & Anor (Approved) [2024] IEHC 556 (20 September 2024)

The plaintiff failed to establish a fair question to be tried regarding the exercise or denial of her right of redemption, and her application on the principal private residence ground was an abuse of process as it had already been settled by consent. No interlocutory relief is warranted.

Citation
[2024] IEHC 556
Parties
Plaintiff: Lucy Ewins; First Defendant: Promontoria Scariff Designated Activity Company; Second Defendant: David O'Connor
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
20 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief Pending Trial)
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Right of Redemption, Principal Private Residence, Injunctions, Abuse of Process, Mortgage Arrears, Receiver's Powers
Property Law Mortgage Law Civil Procedure Right of Redemption Principal Private Residence Injunctions Abuse of Process Mortgage Arrears +1 more

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

Parties

Lucy Ewins

Plaintiff

Promontoria Scariff Designated Activity Company

First Defendant

David O'Connor

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Interlocutory (application for Interim Relief Pending Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interlocutory injunction restraining sale and interference with property
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's right of redemption was unlawfully denied
  3. 3 Whether the application on the principal private residence ground constitutes an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish a fair question to be tried regarding the exercise or denial of her right of redemption, and her application on the principal private residence ground was an abuse of process as it had already been settled by consent. No interlocutory relief is warranted.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Plaintiff's application for interlocutory injunction is refused.