Elderly sisters again in court over home sale

Two elderly sisters who have fought for several years to prevent the sale of their home for £400,000 - estimated to be a fifth…

Two elderly sisters who have fought for several years to prevent the sale of their home for £400,000 - estimated to be a fifth of its present value - were in court again yesterday.

Ms Eileen and Ms Rose Blackhall were in the High Court to hear an appeal by developers Chessington Ltd against a Circuit Civil Court decision to block the sale to it of the property at Marino Park, Blackrock, Co Dublin.

Last June Judge Liam Devally in the Circuit Civil Court refused to direct the County Registrar to execute a deed of conveyance to Chessington, thus effectively nullifying the contract of sale.

The sisters, one of whom is wheelchair-bound, are joint owners of the property with their sister-in-law, Ms Iris Blackhall, widow and administrator of the estate of their brother, Mr Gerald Blackhall.

READ MORE

In 1995 Judge James Carroll in the Circuit Civil Court ordered the sale of the property to Chessington if the company was prepared to pay £400,000 for it. Before leaving the court Mr John McDonald, director of the company, signed the contract which stipulated that a deposit of £40,000 should be paid.

In February 1997 the case came on appeal before Ms Justice Laffoy who affirmed Judge Carroll's order in the High Court. The case went to the Supreme Court which affirmed Ms Justice Laffoy's judgments.

Following many unsuccessful revisits to the High Court, the case came back to the Circuit Court where Judge Devally was asked by Bray solicitor Mr Brendan Maloney, who had been given carriage of sale of the property, to order the execution of a deed of conveyance to the purchaser.

Judge Devally found that all parties, including Chessington, had constructive knowledge that only 12.5 per cent of the deposit on foot of the purchase contract had been paid and that no one had ever requested payment of the outstanding 87.5 per cent of the deposit.

He said that if Chessington believed it had a contract, the correct thing to have done would have been to pay the deposit. He believed that by allowing years to pass before even tendering the deposit the developer was in fundamental breach of Section 31 of the contract of sale, nullifying the contract of sale.

Yesterday the background to the case was outlined again in the High Court to Mr Justice Finnegan when an appeal by Chessington against the Circuit Court order began. Mr Brian Leonard SC, for Mr Brendan Maloney, solicitor, said that what Mr Justice Finnegan had to decide was if the sale to Chessington should proceed and if so, give directions to Mr Maloney as to how he should proceed.

Mr Justice Finnegan said the case came down to a straight fight between the defendants and the purchaser as to whether there was a valid contract in place.

Giving evidence, Mr Michael Carrigan, solicitor for Mr McDonald, said no conscious decision was made not to pay the deposit. "We were simply not asked for it," he said.

However, Mr McDonald had lodged £50,000 with him which was to go towards the deposit and he still held this money. In May 1999 he forwarded a cheque for £35,000 - the balance of the deposit - to Mr Maloney's office.

Mr George Brady SC, with Mr Michael Forde SC (for Ms Rose and Ms Eileen Blackhall) said that by this time, however, his clients had rescinded the contract because they felt it had been breached by virtue of the deposit not having been paid. "The money was paid after we had nailed our colours to the mast," counsel said.

The case has been adjourned for mention to February 29th when a date will be fixed to continue the hearing.