McCombe and Another v Sheehan and Another

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date19 March 1954
Date19 March 1954
CourtHigh Court
McCombe and Another v. Sheehan and Another
ENA McCOMBE and FINOLA LEANE
Plaintiffs
and
INA SHEEHAN and WILLIAM STACK
Defendants.

Landlord and tenant - Lease - Rent Restrictions Acts - Expiration of lease - Lessee remaining in possession - Acceptance of rent by lessor - Whether lessee a contractual or statutory tenant - Death of tenant - Tenant's niece by marriage residing with tenant - Whether a member of tenant's "family"- Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act, 1923 (No. 19of 1923) - Rent Restrictions Act, 1946 (No. 4 of 1946), s. 39, sub-s. 3.

Appeal to the High Court on Circuit.

The plaintiffs, Ena McCombe and Finola Leane, by ejectment civil bill on the title, sought to recover possession of certain premises situate in the town of Listowel, in the County of Kerry, "lately held by one Mary Foran on a statutory tenancy from the plaintiffs which said tenancy determined on the 7th August 1953 on the death of the said Mary Foran." The defendant, Ina Sheehan, a niece by marriage of the said Mary Foran, had resided with her in the premises for some fifteen years prior to the institution of proceedings. The defendant, William Stack, Was joined as a party to the proceedings as personal representative of Mary Foran.

The facts are summarised in the headnote and are fully stated in the judgment of Murnaghan J., post. At the hearing in the Circuit Court, the Circuit Judge gave a decree for possession, holding that Mary Foran had retained possession of the premises after the expiration of her lease by virtue of the provisions of the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act, 1923, and was not a contractual tenant of the premises at the date of her death, and holding further that the defendant, Ina Sheehan, was not a member of the "family" of Mary Foran within the meaning of s. 39, sub-s. 3 (a), of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1946. The defendants now appealed to the High Court on Circuit, sitting in Dublin.

F. held certain premises in Listowel in the County of Kerry under lease for a term of twenty-two years, which term expired on the 19th January, 1942. The premises were premises to which the Rent Acts applied. On the expiration of the lease F. continued in occupation of the premises and rent was paid to, and accepted by, the lessor and his successors. F. died on the 7th August, 1953, leaving S., her niece by marriage, who had been residing with her for approximately fifteen years prior to her death, in occupation of the premises. The plaintiffs, as successors in title to the lessor named in the lease, instituted proceedings by ejectment civil bill on the title, claiming possession of the premises on the ground that F. had held the premises under a statutory tenancy which had terminated on her death, and the Circuit Court Judge granted a decree for possession. On appeal to the High Court it was

Held by Murnaghan J. 1, that the circumstantial evidence which formerly supported an inference of a tenancy from year to year on a contractual basis ceased to have that effect on the passing of the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest Restrictions Act, 1923; after the passing of the said Act the same evidence became open to the construction that there was an agreement that the tenant should retain possession under the provisions of that Act (and, later, of the Act of 1946). The inference that the tenant who holds over on the termination of a lease retains possession under and by virtue of the Rent Acts should prevail. There being no evidence of an express agreement for a new contractual tenancy between F. and her landlord after the expiration of her lease, it should be inferred that she retained possession under the provisions of the Rent Act, 1923, and that she was a statutory tenant at the date of her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Jordan and Another v O'Brien
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1961
    ...of s. 39, sub-s. 3 of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1946, his (Murnaghan J.'s) own decision in McCombe and Another v. Sheehan and AnotherIR[1954] I.R. 183 notwithstanding. Held by the Supreme Court (Lavery, Kingsmill Moore and Maguire JJ.) that the word, "family," as used in the Rent Restricti......
  • O'Leary and Others v The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 24 February 2012
    ...9.12.2003 2004/6/1247 OLENCZUK v MIN FOR JUSTICE UNREP SMYTH 25.1.2002 2002/22/5645 JORDAN & ANOR v O'BRIEN 1960 IR 363 MCCOMBE v SHEEHAN 1954 IR 183 RENT RESTRICTIONS ACT 1946 S39(3)(A) X (R) v MIN FOR JUSTICE 2011 1 ILRM 444 2010/54/13491 2010 IEHC 446 BOULTIF v SWITZERLAND UNREP ECHR 2.......
  • Olenczuk and Olenczuk v Minister for Justice
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 25 January 2002
    ...NA HEIREANN A STUDY OF THE IRISH TEXT JORDAN & ANOR V O'BRIEN 1960 IR 363 RENT RESTRICTIONS ACT 1946 MCCOMBE & ANOR V SHEEHAN & ANOR 1954 IR 183 RENT RESTRICTIONS ACT 1960 S31(3) RENT RESTRICTIONS ACT 1960 S31(4) RENT RESTRICTIONS ACT 1960 S31(5) O'BRIEN V MS & AG 1984 IR 316 HEAGRTY & HO......
  • Blake v Attorney General
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1982
    ...I.L.T.R. 65. 27 Condon v. Minister for Labour [1981] I.R. 62. 28 Siney v. Corporation of Dublin [1980] I.R. 400. 29 McCombe v. Sheehan [1954] I.R. 183. 30 Boland v. An Taoiseach [1974] I.R. 338. 31 Cahill v. Sutton [1980] I.R. 269. 32 O'Brien v. Manufacturing Engineering Co. [1973] I.R. 334......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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