Mother wins leave to contest eviction

A mother of two who was told to quit her Dublin Corporation flat after her former boyfriend was arrested there on drugs charges…

A mother of two who was told to quit her Dublin Corporation flat after her former boyfriend was arrested there on drugs charges secured High Court leave yesterday to challenge her eviction.

Mr Gerry Charlton SC, for Ms Martina Dempsey, unemployed, of Balcurris Road, Ballymun, was given leave by Mr Justice Geoghegan to seek a number of orders against the corporation, including an order quashing a notice to quit the three-bedroomed flat where Ms Dempsey has lived for nearly 10 years.

In an affidavit, Ms Dempsey said she lived in the flat with her two daughters. She had had a long-term relationship with a man who held the tenancy of another premises.

She understood the corporation had taken proceedings in respect of those premises and they were no longer occupied.

READ MORE

She believed that man was prosecuted and convicted of possession of cannabis resin and ecstasy for sale and supply. He was in her flat when he was apprehended in respect of those offences.

She had no criminal convictions in respect of drug possession or drug dealing. She did not and had not permitted her premises to be used for either possession or sale of illicit drugs.

The man was sentenced to one year's imprisonment. He had not been living at her flat. She believed he was at present undergoing rehabilitation.

The corporation had never personally served on her a notice to quit and demand for possession, but had summonsed her to appear in court for a warrant under the Housing Acts. In July 1998 a District Court judge, upon hearing evidence, said the corporation should "get their facts right before coming to court" and dismissed the application.

She was summonsed again by the corporation but a judge dismissed the application.

The corporation filed a notice of appeal which came before the Circuit Court in March and was adjourned to May 20th next. She had not received any notification in writing as to why the corporation had sought the warrant.

After she received the notice of appeal from the last District Court case, she contacted a corporation official. He asked if she was up to date with her rent and she replied that she was.

The official informed her nothing was showing on his computer as to why the corporation was seeking a warrant, but requested that she contact another official.

When she phoned that official, he informed her she was being brought to court because of antisocial behaviour. He did not elaborate further. She had not received any communication from him since.

As a result of her concern after being informed that the corporation was seeking a warrant for her ejectment on grounds of antisocial behaviour, she canvassed her immediate neighbours and received a signed petition from 12 of them confirming they had no objection to her continued tenancy.