A High Court judge has expressed concerns about “foreign owned funds” citing fire safety issues when seeking orders to put people out of their homes immediately.
Mr Justice Paul Gilligan, who said he was speaking generally and not about any particular case, made the comments after an action by a fund — Targeted Investment Opportunities ICAV (TIO) — against a young couple, Sean O’Nuanain and his pregnant partner Melanie Mook — was briefly mentioned before him on Friday.
The fund wants various orders against the couple, including an injunction preventing them occupying premises at 85-86 Barrack Street, Cork.
The couple, who are living at the premises and expecting their first child in August, oppose the application and say, if eveitced, they are at risk of “immediate homelessness”.
After being told the fund was relying on fire safety grounds, the judge said he was taking a certain view about the number of cases beginning “to creep in” where foreign owned funds, or receivers acting for them, seek to immediately put people out of their homes over fire safety concerns.
The judge said he was speaking “in general terms” and not taking a view on any specific case but what he was saying was “a fair comment” and something he was happy to say “quite openly”.
In its action against the couple, the fund claims it purchased the property in December 2014. The previous owners were Titan Developments and the property had been subject of a mortgage from Bank of Ireland.
The fund says it was registered in March 2015 as the full owner of 85-86 Barrack Street, which consists of adjoining properties No 86 is a commercial premises on the ground floor with a residential dwelling upstairs while there are residential dwellings on the ground and first floor of number 85.
In a sworn statement, the fund said neither it nor the previous owners granted the couple a valid tenancy allowing them remain in the properties. It claims they are trespassing and have no legal entitlement to be there.
An engineers report concerning the premises, commissioned earlier this year by the defendants, has identified several fire safety concerns and issues about the structural integrity of the buildings, it added.
The couple had also advertised the property for rental on Airbnb.
Nevan Powell BL, FOR TIO, said his client has not been able to enter the premises and carry out an inspection.
The couple, who represented themselves in court, say they have a written agreement to allow them remain in the properties.
They say they have resided in, and operated a business from, the premises for several years and had been in negotiations with the agents for the owners for a lease. They sought a long term lease with a first refusal on sale at market rate, and at one stage last year believed they had agreed terms of an agreement.
The couple also said they had carried out repairs to the buildings at their own expense and invested a lot of time, resources and expense into the properties, especially the garden.
At one stage they ran a vegetable shop from the premises, “The Lettuce Inn.”
While that business ceased, they had plans for a deli counter and were under the impression a negotiation was ongoing but earlier this month were informed TIO was seeking vacant possession of the property. If evicted, they are at risk of “immediate homelessness”, they argue.
The judge has adjourned the case for two weeks to allow the couple time to formally reply to the fund’s application for an injunction.