A legally separated married woman, who lived for 20 years with her husband's mother, has lost a claim for beneficial interest in the marital home, and any right to continue living in it.
Judge Liam Devally said in Dublin Circuit Civil Court that Ms Fidelma Conway, of Robin Villas, Palmerstown, did not have a claim against her pensioner mother-in-law's property.
He told Mr Ronan Dolan, counsel for the mother-in-law, Mrs Kathleen Conway, that in reality the plaintiff was visiting the sins of her husband, Mr David Conway, on his mother.
Judge Devally said that before and since their marriage in 1981 they had lived with Mr Conway's mother, who denied she had ever told her daughter-in-law she could make the house her family home.
The couple had never paid rent as such, but contributed to bills and household upkeep to an extent of about £60 a week. When the marriage broke up five years ago, the wife had continued to live with her mother-in-law.
Judge Devally said that since 1995 she had made no contribution, nor had she taken any interest in the affairs of the house. She simply looked after herself and had frequently been absent from Fridays to Mondays. Her mother-in-law had suggested she might find somewhere else to live.
"Since then we have all experienced unprecedented increases in house values and rampant inflation in rents and properties," Judge Devally said. The mother-in-law had a heavy fall last year and, because she had been living alone for a large part of the week, decided to sell the Palmerstown house which had always been registered in her name.
It was still her intention to live in a granny flat with a niece in Longford and maintain her independence with the proceeds from the sale of her home. Her daughter-in-law had instigated court proceedings when the house had gone up for sale.
Judge Devally said the daughter-in-law, despite having been involved in family law proceedings which ended in a maintenance agreement, had failed to produce evidence of either having declared or claimed an interest in her mother-in-law's home.
The daughter-in-law had been "imprecise and unconvincing" in her evidence of a family home promise prior to the marriage. Lengthy weekly absences from the house, her failure to contribute to its upkeep or flag a part-interest in either residence or ownership had put a large question mark over the accuracy of her evidence.
The judge said that, while he had much sympathy with the daughter-in-law's plight, he had to dismiss her claim and order her to leave the house.
He awarded the mother-in-law £3,500 damages for loss of fees for the abortive sale of her home with costs against the plaintiff.