Receiver denies being in contempt of orders to have ‘firetrap’ properties vacated

A bank-appointed receiver over three Dublin properties described as being “firetraps” has rejected claims by Dublin City Council that he is in contempt of court orders to have the buildings vacated.

The council this week commenced proceedings seeking to have Stephen Tennant of Grant Thornton come before the court to explain the alleged failure to comply with court orders to have the buildings vacated.

Mr Tennant was appointed receiver by AIB and AIB Mortgage Bank in October 2016 over properties located at 100, 101 and 104 Seville Place in Dublin 1.

Mr Justice Seamus Noonan described the buildings as “firetraps” when the matter was before the courts in October. The council then secured injunctions requiring the residents of the three properties, which are divided into flats or bedsits, to immediately vacate the buildings.

The properties were to remain vacant until they complied with fire safety regulations but a large number of non-Irish nationals remain in the properties.

‘Strongly denied’

When the matter returned before the High Court on Thursday, Rossa Fanning SC, for Mr Tennant, said his client will “fully contest” the claims of contempt of court, which are “strongly denied”.

Counsel said Mr Tennant is taking the allegation “extremely seriously” and two affidavits setting out the receiver’s position have been sworn and provided to the council.

In the meantime, counsel asked that the matter be adjourned for a week to allow for constructive talks with the council regarding the situation.

Karen Denning BL, for the council, consented to the adjournment and Mr Justice Meenan agreed to adjourn the matter for a week.

The council has said it has received complaints from residents living in the area about the occupants engaging in anti-social behaviour. It claims the receiver, as the person in charge of the properties, is in contempt of the order requiring the buildings to be vacated.

Very poor repair

Inspections carried out by the council’s senior fire safety officials revealed the three properties were in very poor repair and, if a fire started in any of them, it would spread quickly, the court heard.

The risk to occupants of the four-storey 190-year-old buildings was so serious that their continued use for residential purposes should be prohibited until several serious fire safety deficiencies are addressed, the council said.

The court had sought orders against the owners of the properties, Vincent and Catherine Donoghue, as well as the receiver and the then occupants.

The Donoghues did not participate in the proceedings and the court heard they have not had control over the properties since the receiver’s appointment.