Ruling has implications for property co-owners

AN unanimous Supreme Court ruling refusing the Revenue an order for sale of lands co-owned by a man and his estranged wife so as to execute judgment orders obtained against the man has major implications for creditors seeking to sell co-owned property to satisfy a judgment mortgage obtained against just one owner.

The effect of the decision is that the courts have no jurisdiction to make an order for sale of the entirety of co-owned property, in lieu of partition of such property, so as to enforce a judgment mortgage.

The Revenue had sought orders entitling it to sell 19 hectares in Co Cork owned by Thomas and Carmel Deasy to satisfy three judgments obtained by it against Thomas Deasy.