Killeen Castle dispute ends up in court as mediation fails

Businessman Patrick White and companies say they have contract to buy land worth €18.5m

A dispute between a project management company and developer Joe O’Reilly’s Castlethorn Construction group over the future of development land worth €18.5 million has been admitted to the Commercial Court after mediation efforts failed.
A dispute between a project management company and developer Joe O’Reilly’s Castlethorn Construction group over the future of development land worth €18.5 million has been admitted to the Commercial Court after mediation efforts failed.

A dispute between a project management company and developer Joe O’Reilly’s Castlethorn Construction group over the future of development land worth €18.5 million has been admitted to the Commercial Court after mediation efforts failed.

Businessman Patrick White and his companies say they have a contract to buy from the Castlethorn group Killeen Castle, Dunsany, Co Meath, to develop a 177-bed hotel, leisure centre, golf course and 130 housing units at the 600 acre site.

Sale

Mr White, and his companies Killeen Project Management Co and KC Killeen Holdings are seeking orders including that Mr O’Reilly and his fellow Castlethorn director John Fitzsimons complete the sale of the land to his side.

The case is also against Castlethorn Construction Unlimited Co, Sasula Unlimited Co and Socnule Unlimited Co.

READ MORE

The defendants deny the claims.

Last month, Mr Justice Denis McDonald adjourned an application by the White side to enter the case into the fast track commercial list after he was told efforts were being made to resolve it through mediation.

On Monday, he was told mediation had failed and both sides now wanted the case admitted to the Commercial Court for a speedy hearing.

Delay

The judge said he had been concerned about the delay in bringing the application to admit to the commercial list and he was not sure that an affidavit from Mr White sufficiently explained the period of delay.

He said the defendants had identified real prejudice as a result of the delay and in circumstances where the plaintiffs had registered a bar on dealing in the property pending legal proceedings – known as a lis pendens – it was therefore urgent from the defendants’ viewpoint that the matter be dealt with speedily.

He therefore admitted the case to the list and adjourned it to February.