Seaconview DAC v Fahey (Approved) [2023] IEHC 191 (24 April 2023)
Court refused retrospective approval for sale because (1) insufficient evidence that best price was achieved without independent valuation, (2) conditions of sale were not settled by conveyancing counsel, and (3) unresolved issues regarding encumbrancers and marketable title.
- Citation
- [2023] IEHC 191
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Seaconview DAC; Defendant: Liam Fahey
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 24 April 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Special Summons / Motion for Approval of Sale Pursuant to Well Charging Order
- Outcome
- motion refused
- Legal Topics
- Well Charging Order, Court Supervised Sale, Mortgage Misdescription, Equitable Interest, Sale of Unregistered Land
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Seaconview DAC
Plaintiff
Liam Fahey
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Special Summons / Motion for Approval of Sale Pursuant to Well Charging Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should retrospectively approve a hybrid sale of property subject to a well charging order without Examiner's supervision
- 2 Whether the sale process achieved the best price for the property
- 3 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to retain sale proceeds absent court-sanctioned sale
Ratio Decidendi
Court refused retrospective approval for sale because (1) insufficient evidence that best price was achieved without independent valuation, (2) conditions of sale were not settled by conveyancing counsel, and (3) unresolved issues regarding encumbrancers and marketable title.
Court Disposition
motion refused
Orders
- reliefs sought in the motion refused
- no order for costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment