A WEEKEND-LONG "squat party", advertised on Facebook for a Dublin city centre property this weekend, has been cancelled, the High Court was told.
Earlier this week a bank-appointed receiver over 31 Mountjoy Square East, where the party was due to take place, had asked the High Court for an injunction preventing the event from going ahead.
The receiver, Sean McNamara, sought orders against several named individuals claiming to reside at the property, including one seeking vacant possession of the building.
The court heard the squat party, which comprised of "two stages of the biggest sounds in drum and base reggae, jungle, dub and psychetrance" was scheduled to begin tonight and run until Monday morning.
When the matter came before Mr Justice Paul Gilligan yesterday, he was told the party had been cancelled and that an agreement had been reached about vacating the premises.
Lawyers acting for the receiver, Mr McNamara, of Smith and Williamson Freaney Ltd., brought proceedings against 10 residents over concerns he had about the party as well as difficulties he had in taking possession of the building.
Mr McNamara was appointed receiver over the four-storey over basement house last April, after the owner had failed to satisfy a demand by Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank for repayment of a loan of €2.48m.
The building, which formed part of security for the loan, contains nine one-bedroom units.
The court heard the building is in a poor state of repair, with an overflowing sewerage system. The interior was covered in graffiti, and parts of the building have been vandalised.
Rubbish had been piled almost two metres high in the basement at the front of the building.
Gardai had informed the receiver that last May that a cannabis growing facility was found in the basement of the building and several arrests had been made.
Barrister Rory Mulcahy, counsel for the receiver, said his client had serious concerns the property could be damaged by the proposed party, which he had been informed only within the last 24 hours was cancelled.
Several of the residents attended court yesterday. One, Wayne Finane, who represented himself, said the application for an injunction was not necessary.
He said the party had been cancelled some days ago, and this information was communicated to the receiver's solicitors.
"Guests" had now been told not to come, he added.
Mr Finane said any issue concerning their residency was a matter for the Private Residential Tenancies Board and not the High Court.
He said he and the others were happy to discuss the situation with the receiver.
On the suggestion of the judge, the parties agreed to enter discussions. Afterwards the court was told the Facebook page advertising the party would be taken down.
Subject to the agreement of all the residents, some of whom were not present in court, it was agreed the property would be vacated.
It was also agreed that should the property be vacated the receiver would not seek the legal costs of the proceedings against the residents.
Mr Justice Gilligan, in agreeing to adjourn the matter to a date later this month, said the parties had come to a sensible agreement.