Doyle v Leahy (Approved) [2025] IEHC 266 (07 May 2025)

Plaintiff's application to admit new evidence meets the legal criteria for admission on appeal; defendant's strike out application fails as the matters could not have been raised in previous proceedings and laches does not apply given prior judicial determinations and opportunity to amend defence remains.

Citation: [2025] IEHC 266
Parties: Plaintiff: Michael Doyle; Defendant: Michael Leahy
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Judgment Date: 07 May 2025
Procedural Posture: Circuit Court Appeal / Interlocutory Motions on Admission of New Evidence and Strike Out Application
Outcome: Plaintiff granted leave to adduce new evidence; defendant's strike out application refused.
Legal Topics: Adverse Possession, Mandatory Injunction, Admission of Fresh Evidence, Doctrine of Laches, Henderson V Henderson Rule

Property Law Civil Procedure Adverse Possession Mandatory Injunction Admission of Fresh Evidence Doctrine of Laches Henderson V Henderson Rule

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Michael Doyle

Plaintiff

Michael Leahy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Circuit Court Appeal / Interlocutory Motions on Admission of New Evidence and Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

1 Whether plaintiff should be permitted to adduce new evidence on appeal
2 Whether defendant's application to strike out proceedings based on Henderson v Henderson and laches should succeed

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Plaintiff granted leave to adduce new evidence; defendant's strike out application refused.

Orders

Plaintiff granted leave to submit affidavits of Reggie Booth, Oliver Carey, and Mark Hilliard as fresh evidence for appeal hearing.
Defendant granted liberty to file affidavit addressing fresh evidence within 4 weeks of perfection of order.