A judge at the High Court has warned a woman and her former partner who broke into and re-occupied their former home in the capital that they will face serious consequences should they repeat their action. 

The former couple were in front of the court late last month after a property, which was previously owned by the man and in which his former partner and their two teenage daughters had lived, was re-entered and resulted in eight new tenants being removed. 

The house was purchased last year by a property firm which last week secured an injunction against the former couple requiring them to leave the house. The judge was informed that the house had now been vacated and that a set of keys had been returned to the property firm, which had regained access to the house. 

The judge warned that should they breach the injunction, restraining interference with the property, they will face “serious consequences”. The former couple reassured the court that they would not interfere with the house again until the property firm’s case had been fully determined. 

The woman had already spent more than 100 days in prison for her failure to comply with the injunction and the judge warned that any further breach could result in both the man and woman being jailed for contempt. 

Furthermore, the judge said she was concerned that the pair’s daughters were being used as “pawns” in the case, that the Child and Family Agency is now aware of the situation and that it was now up to the agency what steps should be taken in relation to this.  

The judge also said that she had was concerned about “disturbing” posts on social media about two of the property firm’s directors and suggested that Twitter should deal with the posts. The man said that the social media posts had nothing to do with him. 

The property firm alleges that there has been “orchestrated attempts”, by persons connected to the pair, to force the directors and their tenants from the property and that there had been attempts to break into it and another property formerly owned by the pair. 

The firm further claimed that one of its directors has been assaulted and that two of them have been subject to a campaign of intimidation and harassment on social media. 

The judge adjourned the case for one week in order to allow the former couple to respond to the allegations against them. 

" In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement."

Contact us for more information

A judge at the High Court has warned a woman and her former partner who broke into and re-occupied their former home in the capital that they will face serious consequences should they repeat their action. 

The former couple were in front of the court late last month after a property, which was previously owned by the man and in which his former partner and their two teenage daughters had lived, was re-entered and resulted in eight new tenants being removed. 

The house was purchased last year by a property firm which last week secured an injunction against the former couple requiring them to leave the house. The judge was informed that the house had now been vacated and that a set of keys had been returned to the property firm, which had regained access to the house. 

The judge warned that should they breach the injunction, restraining interference with the property, they will face “serious consequences”. The former couple reassured the court that they would not interfere with the house again until the property firm’s case had been fully determined. 

The woman had already spent more than 100 days in prison for her failure to comply with the injunction and the judge warned that any further breach could result in both the man and woman being jailed for contempt. 

Furthermore, the judge said she was concerned that the pair’s daughters were being used as “pawns” in the case, that the Child and Family Agency is now aware of the situation and that it was now up to the agency what steps should be taken in relation to this.  

The judge also said that she had was concerned about “disturbing” posts on social media about two of the property firm’s directors and suggested that Twitter should deal with the posts. The man said that the social media posts had nothing to do with him. 

The property firm alleges that there has been “orchestrated attempts”, by persons connected to the pair, to force the directors and their tenants from the property and that there had been attempts to break into it and another property formerly owned by the pair. 

The firm further claimed that one of its directors has been assaulted and that two of them have been subject to a campaign of intimidation and harassment on social media. 

The judge adjourned the case for one week in order to allow the former couple to respond to the allegations against them. 

" In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement."

 

Contact us for more information