Lynam v Butler

JurisdictionIreland
CourtHigh Court (Irish Free State)
Judgment Date02 March 1925
Date02 March 1925
Docket Number(1924. No. 5898.)
(1924. No. 5898.)
Lynam v. Butler
FRANCIS LYNAM
Plaintiff
and
REVEREND MICHAEL BUTLER. Defendant

Landlord and tenant - Action for recovery of possession - Expiration of lease - Order declaring the holding to be one to which the Land Act, 1923,applies - Effect of Order - Alteration in the relationship of landlord and tenant - Position of tenant - Rights conferred - Land Act, 1923 (No. 42 of 1923), sect. 19, sub-sect. (3), sect. 24, sub-sect. (1), sects. 28, 29, 73, sub-sect. (2).

Trial of Action.

The plaintiff claimed possession of 1, the house, Offices, and lands of Mount Seskin, situate in the parish of Tallaght, barony of Upper Cross, and County of Dublin; 2, that part of the lands of Mount Seskin, known as the Causeway Farm; and 3, the shooting and all other ground rights attached to the said lands.

Mary MacInerney was, on and prior to the 30th day of July, 1920, seized as tenant for life of the said hereditaments, and continued so seize,d until the day of her death. By an Indenture of Lease dated the 30th day of July, 1920, the said Mary MacInerney demised the hereditaments to the defendant for the term of her natural life. She died on the 22nd day of August, 1924.

The plaintiff claimed possession as owner in fee-simple of the hereditaments under the limitations contained in the will of Francis Lynam, his title having accrued on the death of the said Mary MacInerney, the tenant for life. He also claimed mesne profits from the 22nd day of August, 1924.

The defendant in his defence stated—1, that he was in possession; 2, that by an Order of Mr. Justice Wylie, dated the 7th day of February, 1924, made in the Court of the Irish Land Commission in a Matter entitled Record No. 179; Landlord:— Mary MacInerney (above mentioned); Tenant:—Michael Butler (the defendant), it was declared that the said hereditaments and premises constituted a holding to which the Land Act, 1923, applied; and that by virtue and in consequence of the said Order the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief claimed; 3, the defendant further said that because of the said proceedings before Mr. Justice Wylie, to which proceedings the plaintiff was a party, the plaintiff was estopped from pleading that he was entitled to recover possession of the said hereditaments and premises; 4, the defendant further relied on the provisions of the Land Act, 1923, and the said Order of Mr. Justice Wylie then having jurisdiction in that behalf, as disentitling the plaintiff to the relief claimed.

The plaintiff in his reply said that, admitting for the purpose of this portion of his reply, the plaintiff was a party to the proceedings mentioned in the defence, the Order made by Mr. Justice Wylie did not, nor did any provision of the Land Act, 1923, prejudice or affect the right of the plaintiff to possession of the lands upon the death of the said Mary MacInerney prior to the vesting of the said lands in the Land Commission on "the appointed day" pursuant to sect. 24, sub-sect. 1, of the said Act. And that no day had...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Tomasz Zalewski v The Workplace Relations Commission, an Adjudication Officer [Y], Ireland and the Attorney General
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 6 April 2021
    ...to the Privy Council in 1925 against the Supreme Court's dismissal of his appeal in what are known as the “Ejectment Proceedings” case ( [1925] 2 I.R. 82 (H.C.): [1925] 2 I.R. 231 (S.C.)): such occurring at a crucial time in the State's ongoing separation from the United Kingdom (Dáil Debat......
  • Keady v Commissioner of an Garda Síochána
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1992
    ......v. An Bord Altranais [1990] 2 I.R. 396. Kiely v. Minister for Social Welfare (No. 2) [1977] I.R. 267. Lynham v. Butler (No. 2) [1933] I.R. 74; (1931) 67 I.L.T.R. 75; [1932] L.J. Ir. 172. M. v. The Medical Council [1984] I.R. 485. In re M. ......
  • Re Lynam's Estate
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court (Irish Free State)
    • 8 February 1928
    ...of any right to recover possession. An appeal to the Supreme Court was dismissed on 14th July, 1925 (reported sub nom.Lynham v. Butler, [1925] 2 I.R. 82, 231). The Judicial committee gave leave to appeal, but the appeal was withdrawn following the passing of the Land Act, 1926. L. served no......
  • Lynham v Butler (No. 2)
    • Ireland
    • High Court (Irish Free State)
    • 1 January 1933
    ...the plaintiff's claim for possession of the lands had been dismissed on the ground that the Land Act, 1923, applied to them (reported [1925] 2 I. R. 82, 231). He also relied upon an order of the Judicial Commissioner, dated February 7th, 1924, declaring that the Land Act, 1923, applied to t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Thomas Mohr, Guardian of the Treaty: The Privy Council Appeal and Irish Sovereignty
    • United Kingdom
    • Edinburgh Law Review Nbr. , May 2018
    • 1 May 2018
    ...“best determined on the spot” and the court dismissed the three petitions. Later cases were less reassuring particularly Lynam v Butler [1925] 2 IR 82 which concerned provisions of the Irish Land Act 1923 which were only of domestic relevance and had no relation to the treaty. More concern ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT