Does The County Registrar Have Jurisdiction To Dismiss Repossession Proceedings For Want Of Prosecution?

• Published date: 19 June 2023
• Subject Matter: Finance and Banking, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Charges, Mortgages, Indemnities, Court Procedure, Trials & Appeals & Compensation
• Law Firm: RDJ LLP
• Author: Ms Hilda Mannix

A recent High Court decision of Ms. Justice Hyland in Permanent TSB plc v Matthew Farrelly [2023] IEHC 255 has clarified the limited jurisdiction of the County Registrar to dismiss repossession proceedings for want of prosecution.

Background

The decision was delivered in the context of an appeal brought by the Defendant against the decision of Judge Linnane in the Dublin Circuit Court on 20 November 2020 whereby she made Orders as follows:

1. setting aside the decision of the Dublin County Registrar on 25 October 2019 to dismiss the underlying repossession proceedings for failure to comply with previous Orders made by the County Registrar; and
2. reconstituting the proceedings so that Start Mortgages Designated Activity Company ("Start") (having acquired the underlying security and loan) was substituted as Plaintiff.

That motion to set aside was brought by Start and the Defendant brought the appeal in respect of Judge Linnane's Order dated 20 November 2020 to the High Court, but incorrectly identified Permanent TSB ("PTSB") as Plaintiff, when in fact it had no part in the appeal.

The specific terms of the Order made by the County Registrar on 25 October 2019 were crucial in the context of Hyland J's decision and were as follows:

"That the plaintiff's civil bill hearing be and the same is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution for failure to comply with the previous court orders. The issue in this case arises with the Plaintiff (sic) compliance with the CCMA and its failure to provide all information to the Defendant"

In addition to a claim for objective bias as against Judge Linnane in how the motion to set aside was heard before her, the Defendant also relied on Order 18(1)(vi) of the Circuit Court Rules (the "CCR") which provides that a County Registrar may make an Order to dismiss an action with costs for want of prosecution. In contrast, Start argued that the County Registrar's powers in the context of repossession proceedings can only be found in Order 5B of the CCR, which order covers actions for possession and well charging reliefs and specifically pointed to Order 5B (7), which grants no additional powers to the County Registrar to strike out proceedings or dismiss proceedings.

Decision

A number of interesting points were addressed by Ms. Justice Hyland in her decision to set aside the Order of the County Registrar and to remit the substantive proceedings back to the Circuit Court for hearing. These are summarised below:

• Section 37 of the Courts of...