The National Land League Celebrate May 20, 2015
(This article was updated one day after publication: additions at end of article)
Circuit Court Con Job
There’s been a con going on in our Circuit Courts for the last few years. It’s a con that the courts, the legal profession and the banks have all been in on together and the veracity of the claim that it has been a con emerged today from the High Courts and a ruling by Ms. Justice Murphy.
Over the years, in an effort at putting efficiency before the rules of the court, the banks have been applying to the Circuit Courts for possession Orders on family homes. The Circuit Court rules are clear that only matters involving less than €75,000 can be heard in the Circuit Court. Now we know most houses are still worth more than €75,000 and to circumvent the rule the banks have, with the complicity of court Registrar’s and the legal industry, been allowing family home possession applications into the Circuit Courts claiming that the rateable value of the property is within the rules as, they claim, the rateable value of the property is under €253 odd. Today’s ruling by Ms. Justice Murphy simply blows the rateable value argument out of the water.
A home does not have a rateable value and has not had a rateable value since the early 1970s. Activists have been arguing this around the country but their arguments have been falling on deaf ears until now. Today in the High Court a jubilant appellant, appealing an Order of Possession on her home from the Circuit Court, and with the advice, support and backing of the Hub-Ireland, broke the mould. In her judgement Ms. Justice Murphy said…
“The Plaintiff maintained that it had invoked and was entitled to the provisions of the valuation act and a letter issued by the Valuations office was sufficient: both these assertions are manifestly unfounded on the evidence…….it appears to the Court on Evidence that the Plaintiff have devised and used an ad hoc non-statutory process which is devoid of legal effect, for the purpose of persuading the Circuit Court that it has jurisdiction which it does not in fact enjoy”.
What are the implications?
So what are the implications of today’s ruling? Firstly, we can expect that banks will be left with no choice but to withdraw their current applications in the Circuit Courts for possession of family homes. If you are in court over the next while demand a strike out. If an Order has been made on your home, it can be considered null and void and as having never existed. Contact your local Sheriff over the next few days and ask what the ruling means for you, meanwhile the various anti-eviction groups around the country will be forwarding the judgement to all Registrar’s and Sheriff’s and requesting their current position in light of the ruling.
You can contact the National Land League on the number below. All calls are strictly confidential and are treated with understanding and kindness. Together we are strong.
We in the National Land League and other groups are not naïve however and we know that it will be the impulse and attitude of the banks, their legal partners and indeed the courts to press on regardless. We must not allow this to happen and the ruling by Ms. Justice Murphy must be enforced primarily by all of the lay-litigants across the country that up until now have been trampled upon.
On a final note, if you are made aware of any attempts to circumvent this ruling within the courts please contact the National Land League, the Hub-Ireland and other groups to let us know. We expect arguments to be made by “the other side” that they are using the Poor Law Valuation (Griffith’s valuation) to enter the Circuit Court. This has been tried before. The PLV was deemed unconstitutional by the High Court in 1981 and this was upheld on Appeal to the Supreme Court. Once more, congratulations to The Hub-Ireland on a ground-shaking result today.
N.B.... update : A deeper analysis of the "Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank -and- Laura Finnegan and Christopher Ward" case within 24 hours of it's reading from the bench reveals a number of exclusions within this judgement and accordingly the author of this article adds the following...
To clarify some details about yesterday's great win in the High Court regarding applications to the Circuit Court for possession Orders on family homes and the jurisdiction level of 75k. Having read the Judgement in its entirety a number of times now, the ruling has most significance for those who took out their mortgages between 2001 and 2009, and in which the bank's initiated proceedings prior to the 31st of July 2013 (the date that the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Amendment Act 2013 took effect).
For those whom the bank have initiated proceedings after the 31/8/13, the ruling is not so clear in that the 2013 Amendment to the LCLRA 2009 changed the law by facilitating banks to initiate home possession cases in the circuit courts despite there being no rateable valuation (the amendment claims to enact a provision from the LCLRA 2009 retrospectively to include mortgages pre-2009).
Where the bank has stated that they have relied on a rateable valuation post 31/8/13 it is strong argument to say that they still cannot rely on this (possibly 50% of current cases). For those whom the bank have initiated proceedings post the 31/8/13, and in which the bank has not claimed to rely on the rateable value for Circuit Court jurisdiction, do not be downhearted as there are a number of possible avenues to push this over the line for you too.
The 2013 amendment is facing a constitutional challenge as we speak because it is essentially retrospective law which is an abomination to the basic principles of law. It would also appear where the loan was an equity release on a property already paid for and not for the purpose of buying a domestic dwelling, and in which the home was used as security and not a "housing loan mortgage" (this is the type of loan the LCLRA 2009 clause refers to), and this is where most older people have been trapped, the case must be heard in the High Court
May 25, 2015 Gardai Brutality in Castlebar Circuit Court
Members of the Mayo branch of the National Land League of Ireland, assisted and supported by Integrity Ireland, gathered at Castlebar Circuit Court today (Monday 25th May 2015) to request clarity in relation to Ms. Murphy's recent judgment in the High Court regarding rateable value.
A spokeperson for Integrity Ireland said " Mr Barrett only wanted to ask a legitimate question which he had lodged with the Court in advance, but Mayo County Registrar Fintan Murphy point-blank refused to hear his question. This is a violation of Article 40 of the Constitution as well as a blatant breach of Court Rules. Mr Murphy has been reported (again) to Gardai for inciting public unrest, and Sgt Hanley has also been reported for seven physical assaults including three which caused actual bodily harm.. The full text of the criminal complaint will be lodged here in due course."