Dully v Athlone Town Stadium Ltd No. 2

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys
• Judgment Date: 16 April 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IEHC 225
• Docket Number: [2017 No. 252 S.P.]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 16 April 2018

BETWEEN

DAVID DULLY

PLAINTIFF

AND

ATHLONE TOWN STADIUM LIMITED

DEFENDANT

AND

FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION OF IRELAND

NOTICE PARTY

(No. 2)

[2018] IEHC 225

[2017 No. 252 S.P.]

THE HIGH COURT

Trusts – Stay order – Deed of trust – Removal of trustees – Breach of duty – Execution of the conveyance

Facts: In the present application, the defendant applied for a stay on all the orders made by the Court in the substantive proceedings, including an order for the stay of the execution of the conveyance. The plaintiff submitted that the application was another attempt to frustrate the Court's orders. The defendant was claiming an entitlement to be paid under the indemnity in the deed of trust.

Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys refused to grant the stay on all its orders. The Court directed the defendant to comply with its orders and execute the conveyance and seal it with the company seal. The Court directed the named person to retain the custody of the company seal pending further order of the Court. The Court found that the plaintiff would be prejudiced if the orders of the Court had not been complied with and the defendant should have obeyed the orders of the Court without any further delay.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 16th day of April, 2018

1 In Dully v. Athlone Town Stadium (No. 1) [2018] IEHC 209 I ordered that the defendant be replaced as a trustee of the trust at issue in the proceedings, directed it to convey the legal title to the trust property to the new trustee, and granted declaratory and other relief. Mr. Michael Forde S.C. for the defendant now applies for a stay on all orders to date, although principally on the order for the execution of the conveyance.

2 Mr. John Paul Shortt S.C. for the plaintiff submits this is another attempt to frustrate court orders and draws attention to the fact that Mr. Forde has already accepted the principle that the defendant would step down as a trustee, although the defendant was contending for an entitlement to be paid under the indemnity in the deed of trust. It seems to me that under those circumstances the court would have to lean against the stay anyway, but in addition, having regard to the question of the balance of convenience and the need for clean hands, under both headings there is a whole litany of breaches of duty by the defendant that make it inappropriate to grant a stay on the execution of the conveyance. Added to that is the...