| 12.4°C Dublin

Judge orders arrest of ‘Revolutionary Housing League’ members occupying Dublin building earmarked for apartments

Concert held at property, court hears, and protesters face being jailed in Mountjoy Prison for contempt of court if they fail to comply

Close

Stock image

Stock image

Stock image

A judge has directed that all persons in breach of an injunction requiring them to vacate a Dublin building being used to house the homeless be arrested and brought before the High Court by the gardaí to answer their failure to comply with that order.

The order was made in respect of persons linked to a group calling itself the Revolutionary Housing League (RHL) which has allegedly illegally occupied Parkgate House in Dublin 8.

At today's vacation sitting of the High Court Mr Justice Mark Heslin said that he was satisfied that there has been a flagrant breach of the injunction granted by the court last week requiring all those in occupation to immediately vacate the premises.

The injunction was secured by the building's owner, financial fund Davy Platform ICAV, acting on behalf of its sub-fund, the Phoenix Sub-fund and Ruirside Developments, plans to develop the now-disused site into 519 rental units and other amenities.

The judge said that he was satisfied from the evidence put before the court that there was an ongoing and deliberate breach of the “clear terms” of the High Court order for which they were made aware.

As a result, the judge said that Sean Doyle, who he said appeared to be the leader of the RHL, and all other persons found on the premises should be brought before the High Court by the gardaí to answer claims that they are in contempt of court.

Should Mr Doyle, or anyone else brought before the court in respect of the matter, by the gardai continue to refuse to comply with the order, they face the possibility to being committed to Mountjoy Prison.

The judge made the orders returnable to next Monday's vacation sitting of the court.

Seeking the orders, Stephen Byrne, BL for the plaintiffs, said that based on observations by agents acting for his clients, and from social media posts, it appeared that the RHL have “no intention” of complying with the High Court order.

Counsel said that the terms of the injunction granted were clear, and that all the relevant persons are aware of the “clear terms” of the injunction.

It appeared that some people were in the process of leaving the building and some personal belongings have been removed, counsel said. However, “a significant number of persons remain on the premises in breach of the court’s order”.

Counsel said that the attachment and committal order was being sought because after the injunction was granted, the RHL organised a concert, with live music, that was attended by approximately 200 persons at the venue last weekend.

Daily Digest Newsletter

Get ahead of the day with the morning headlines at 7.30am and Fionnán Sheahan's exclusive take on the day's news every afternoon, with our free daily newsletter.

This field is required

Mr Byrne said that another event may be held at the property and his clients have serious health and safety concerns about the building, and say that it is unsuitable for accommodating persons.

Counsel added that arising out the fact that his clients are unable to secure the building, insurance cover for the building has been withdrawn by the insurer.

Mr Byrne said that social media posts from persons alleged to be in breach of the order suggested that RHL believed that orders for their attachment and committal had already been made and that their arrest was imminent. A protest had been organised outside the building this morning, the court heard.

The application for the attachment and committal order was not opposed, and there were no appearances nor representations made on behalf of those alleged to be in breach of the orders.

The plaintiffs claim that members of the RHL have barricaded themselves into the building and have refused to leave.

Arising out of their failure to vacate the premises, the plaintiffs brought High Court proceedings against all persons in occupation of the building and a number of named individuals including Mr Doyle.

The property was formerly operated by a fabric wholesalers, Hickey and Company Ltd, which vacated the site two years ago.

It was claimed illegally occupied since late August when banners were seen hanging over the side of the property that adjoins the River Liffey and that the defendants had “barricaded themselves into the property”.

Representing himself in court last week, Mr Doyle opposed the application for the injunction.

He said that the building had been acquired, was renamed Ionad Seán Heuston, and was being used to help homeless persons of all nationalities during a time of a homelessness crisis.


Most Watched





Privacy