A woman described as living an “exotic” lifestyle has lost her appeal against a High Court order permitting Criminal Assets Bureau (Cab) receivers to sell her Co Laois family home on the basis it was purchased with the proceeds of crime.
In a judgment issued on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal dismissed Mary Cash’s appeal, saying the mother of three advanced “no real grounds” in her argument against the orders made concerning the Harpur’s Lane, Portlaoise property.
Ms Cash (33) has now failed in two appeals arising from High Court orders made in the Cab’s civil action brought against her under the Proceeds of Crime Act.
In January 2024 the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s finding that the house had been purchased with crime proceeds.
Woman living ‘exotic’ lifestyle fails to overturn order allowing receiver to sell her home
AIB official who spent decades moonlighting as a barman loses dismissal claim
Finding of professional misconduct made against former deputy State pathologist Dr Khalid Jaber
Irishwoman in El Salvador: I’m 60 and moved halfway around the world. Everything is different
She was ordered last April to vacate the property by September. She appealed that order along with one appointing receivers with the power to sell the house.
Her appeal centred on a contention the High Court had given “inadequate consideration” to her claim she and her children “risked homelessness and disruption” if required to move.
In a judgment for the three-judge appeal court, Ms Justice Nuala Butler said the High Court’s Mr Justice Alexander Owens was “cognisant of and took account” of the difficulties Ms Cash and her children would likely face in allowing a receiver to sell the house.
She noted he proposed to give “some leeway” to Ms Cash and her family “to afford them the opportunity to try and arrange their affairs”. She noted a four-month pause to the orders was “specifically tailored” to allow Ms Cash to make alternative arrangements for her children’s schooling.
Ahead of her appeal hearing, the Court of Appeal refused to extend the stay. By the time the case was heard last December the orders had taken effect and Ms Cash had vacated the house.
The court disagreed with Cab’s contention that the appeal was therefore moot.
Ms Cash further argued Mr Justice Owens wrongly rejected her offer of an undertaking to procure “proper and valid” insurance for the house. The High Court previously heard Cab had a “significant concern” that the house was uninsured.
Ms Justice Butler dismissed this ground to the appeal, saying the lack of insurance can be a “decisive factor” in making orders in a case such as this, but “it does not necessarily follow” that the existence of an insurance policy means orders should not be made.
The judge noted the evidence put before the High Court was that Ms Cash “was unlikely to be able to secure insurance” for the house.
Ms Justice Máire Whelan and Ms Justice Mary Faherty agreed with Ms Justice Butler’s judgment.
In its High Court proceedings, Cab had claimed the house was purchased mortgage-free in 2018 with proceeds derived from burglaries allegedly carried out by her husband, Andrew Cash, and her brother, Henry Kiely. Neither of them were subject to the proceedings.
Ms Cash argued the home was bought with money earned from her work as a cleaner, childminder and escort while she was in Australia with her husband in 2015.
Mr Justice Owens found Ms Cash’s “half explanations” for the origin of the funds used to purchase the house and luxury goods “simply did not hold water”.
Mr Justice Owens said the Cash family led an “exotic lifestyle” involving a lot of discretionary spending with “not a scratch of information” to explain how she came to afford through lawful earnings so many handbags and “various items of bling”.
He found, on the balance of probabilities, the home and other assets represented the direct or indirect proceeds of crime.
In 2023, Ms Cash pleaded guilty at Kilkenny Circuit Court to charges of money laundering. She received a suspended sentence.
