Charleton v Hassett (Approved) [2021] IEHC 746 (30 November 2021)

Charleton v Hassett (Approved) [2021] IEHC 746 (30 November 2021)

The plaintiff failed to establish sufficient evidence of valid novation of his appointment as receiver and mortgagee’s agent to Everyday Finance DAC, failed to prove entitlement to possession at the relevant time, and did not demonstrate that damages would be inadequate or that the balance of justice favoured granting interlocutory relief. The defendant was entitled to inspect the relevant documents, and the application was, in substance, an attempt to obtain summary judgment via interlocutory orders, which is impermissible.

Citation
[2021] IEHC 746
Parties
Plaintiff: Luke Charleton; Defendant: John Hassett
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application in Plenary Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Injunction)
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction refused
Legal Topics
Receivership, Mortgage Enforcement, Interlocutory Injunctions, Agency, Possession Proceedings, Novation, Consumer Protection, Inspection of Title Deeds
Property Law Banking Law Civil Procedure Receivership Mortgage Enforcement Interlocutory Injunctions Agency Possession Proceedings +3 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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Luke Charleton

Plaintiff

John Hassett

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application in Plenary Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Injunction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was validly appointed as receiver and mortgagee’s agent after the alleged novation to Everyday Finance DAC
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interlocutory injunctive relief restraining the defendant from interfering with the property
  3. 3 Whether the defendant was entitled to inspect the original mortgage and related documents

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish sufficient evidence of valid novation of his appointment as receiver and mortgagee’s agent to Everyday Finance DAC, failed to prove entitlement to possession at the relevant time, and did not demonstrate that damages would be inadequate or that the balance of justice favoured granting interlocutory relief. The defendant was entitled to inspect the relevant documents, and the application was, in substance, an attempt to obtain summary judgment via interlocutory orders, which is impermissible.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction refused