New Approach To Lay Litigants, Mediation Act And More

A key feature of 2017 was a deepening recognition and response by the courts to the problems associated with organised lay litigant groups and lay advisors seeking to obstruct and frustrate the administration of justice.

Other significant developments included:

definitive clarification of the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court in possession proceedings; on-going clarification of the rights of purchasers of loans and security; and the Mediation Act 2017. Response to abuses of process

Over the past year, the courts have been moving to address the inappropriate behaviour of certain litigants in person, and their lay advisors (commonly referred to as McKenzie friends), some of whom feature in numerous cases.1

A practice direction was introduced relating to McKenzie friends,2 which enhanced the ability of the courts to manage the activities of these individuals.

After a number of threatened orders, in October 2017, the High Court made an order prohibiting an individual from acting as a McKenzie friend in any proceedings, without the leave of the President of the High Court.3 It also made an enhanced Isaac Wunder order, which prohibited the Plaintiff, or any persons acting in concert with her, from issuing proceedings, without the leave of the President.

It is to be hoped that such orders of this type, along with the possibility of costs orders being made against McKenzie friends, will cause such parties to take a more measured and realistic approach to litigation.

Circuit Court Jurisdiction in Possession Proceedings

The Supreme Court determined4 that the Circuit Court has jurisdiction to hear possession proceedings in all case where the property either:

has a rateable valuation that does not exceed €253.95; or does not actually have a rateable valuation. This judgment has overturned a slightly problematic judgment of the Court of Appeal5 and provides clarity as to the forum in which lenders can enforce security.

The rights of purchasers of loans and security

A number of challenges have been made in recent years regarding the ability of lenders to assign loans and security, the ability of purchasers to enforce loans that they have acquired and the mechanics by which this is accomplished.

Most of these challenges have ultimately been resolved in favour of the purchasers, subject to one or two procedural adaptations.

One issue that has been clarified during the year is that a sale of the loan does not affect the appointment of a receiver. In...