Peter McVerry Trust seeks injunctions against trespassers in three properties
Mr Justice Brian Cregan granted the trust orders preventing trespass by "persons unknown" at an apartment in Cabra Road, Phibsborough, a multi-unit building on the North Circular Road, Grangegorman, and a three storey Georgian building on Drumcondra Road Lower. The order also applies to three individuals who gave their names when a security company was sent to find out what was going on at the buildings.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Daily Mirror
7 hours ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Debunked: Conor McGregor makes series of misleading claims in court rant
Conor McGregor has made a number of misleading claims - after losing his appeal of a civil finding that he raped Nikita Hand. In a lengthy and rambling post on social media platform X, McGregor sensationally stated that he has no intention of paying the legal fees of James Lawrence - who the High court previously heard he referred to his solicitors and admitted paying his bills. In his post McGregor referred to the November High Court case which he lost and the appeal case which he also lost as a 'shake down,' and insisted he didn't say he was paying Lawrence's fees. 'You are out of your f*cking mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs, folks. Who said I was paying his fees?'I said I didn't know if I was, when the accusers barrister asked me on the stand, as I didn't. (who is paying his own fees I should have asked him at that time) ???' he posted. However in the High Court case itself McGregor was pressed by trial Judge Alexander Owens if he was paying Lawrence's fees or not. In response to cross examination first from Ms Hand's Counsel McGregor stated that he 'possibly' paid James Lawrence legal fees and referred him to them. 'I'm not 100 per cent. I get staggering legal bills.' The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week Judge Owens then stated to McGregor that it was a simple question - did he pay Lawrence's bills or not. McGregor responded by saying: 'I believe I did.' In refusing Lawrence costs at the conclusion of the High Court case in November, Judge Owens said both men were acting in "lockstep" in their defence of the action and it would be inappropriate to award costs to Mr Lawrence even though the jury found he did not rape Ms Hand. The Court of Appeal this week refused to allow Lawrence to be paid his costs as they too found that the money would ultimately end up going to McGregor, who was paying his fees. Nikita Hand speaking to the media after attending the Court of Appeal (Image: Collins Photos) McGregor goes on to claim in his new post that he was 'on the stand in a world of fog being accused of a crime I didn't commit, and that I was actually cleared of criminally and exonerated by every witness present, as well as believed twice over by the public prosecutor, but still up on a stand civilly, in absolute shock.' This statement is also misleading - as McGregor was not in fact 'cleared' or 'exonerated.' Gardai did investigate the alleged rape and sent a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). However the DPP decided not to take the case and therefore no criminal charges were levelled against the UFC fighter. This by itself does not mean McGregor was 'cleared' or 'exonerated' of the claims - just that he was not charged or convicted of any criminal offence. However the finding by the civil jury in November that he was liable for assault - whereby the assault in question was the rape that occurred in the Beacon Hotel in Sandyford in 2018, means the fighter can hardly claim he was 'exonerated.' The finding of the jury has also now been upheld by the three Judges of the Court of Appeal. McGregor goes on to make claims about why the criminal case did not go ahead - stating that there was plenty of evidence of CCTV footage which he claimed showed Ms Hand 'partying away, messaging away' and leaving and coming back to the hotel 'not a f*cking laughing, dancing, kissing, biting, play fighting. It's some watch. I was home HOURS and this is all going on,' he wrote. All of the footage was played in full and repeatedly re shown to the jury in the civil trial - with them ultimately siding with Ms Hand who stated she was drunk and not in the right state of mind at the time of the footage. Having been shown this footage and heard arguments from both sides they nonetheless sided with her, that she had been raped in the room by McGregor. McGregor goes on to attack Ms Hand in his post by saying: 'How people sleep at night is beyond me. I'm sure they don't. Not soundly anyway, no way. Impossible. To falsely accuse someone of rape and lose, then attempt to ignore that fact/brush it under the rug is truly heinous on another level!' However Ms Hand did not lose her case - she in fact won it, and had it re affirmed this week by three learned Judges of the Court of Appeal. Mr McGregor can continue to claim he did not rape Ms Hand - and it is a fact that he is not convicted of the criminal offence. He has however been found to have raped Ms Hand and is liable for it, by a civil jury. He now claims he 'welcomes' the new case taken by Ms Hand against him and the suddenly withdrawn proposed witnesses, couple Samantha O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins. Ms Hand is suing McGregor, Ms O'Reilly and Stephen Cummins for damages for 'malicious abuse of the process of the court.' It comes after McGregor's own Counsel announced at the opening of the appeal earlier this month that they would not be called as witnesses - after admitting that the evidence was not sustainable. Now in his new post McGregor is trying to claim that the evidence of Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins ought to have been heard - despite his own legal team arguing it shouldn't. 'I believed their claim, as portions of it was verified through the response affidavit to it,' he claimed. 'Why these two witnesses were not called, i will never know. It was on the very morning of. They were present and very eager to testify,' he claimed. 'It seemed they were pulled out of fear from my appointed team tbh. For what I don't know. These people said they seen something, let us all hear. If it's legit, great, it sounds very legit to me. If it's not, it's on them.' After the evidence was suddenly withdrawn the Judges of the Court of Appeal made the decision to refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), after reading submissions from Ms Hand's legal team about the couple. Ms Hand's Counsel flagged concerns that potential perjury had been committed by the couple - and subornation of perjury by Conor McGregor himself for attempting to introduce the now withdrawn 'evidence.' He now claims he is 'happy this is still ongoing' - despite now being liable for a staggering €2M legal bill he has to pay Nikita Hand - and the remainder of the €250,000 award. Sign up to the Irish Mirror's Courts and Crime newsletter here and get breaking crime updates and news from the courts direct to your inbox.
Irish Times
7 hours ago
- Irish Times
Court steps in after man gives €350,000 to poor to get to heaven
The High Court has stepped in to protect the interests of a farmer who has already given €350,000 cash to homeless and poor people on the basis God has promised him a seat in heaven. Mr Justice Michael Twomey on Friday appointed a guardian to represent the best interests of the farmer, aged in his forties, who, the court heard, only last week gave €1,000 cash to a homeless woman he met. Solicitor Katherine Kelleher, speaking on behalf of the Health Service Executive (HSE), told Judge Twomey the man had recently sold his farm for around €600,000 and by May last had been left with just €288,000 in two bank accounts. A medical report was handed into court. READ MORE 'The situation is that in a short number of weeks he has again given away added sums in the region of €38,000,' Ms Kelleher said. 'His bank accounts are literally haemorrhaging cash. I have received a phone call just this morning revealing that in one of the accounts there is now an overdraft of €65,000.' She told Judge Twomey the man claimed he had been told by God to give away all of his money and if he did so he would get to heaven. Ms Kellleher said she was applying to the court on behalf of the HSE for the appointment of a guardian ad litem to look after the best interests of the man. His total funds now stand at €250,000. Judge Twomey said he would appoint a guardian ad litem in light of the evidence that had been presented to the court. He said he would also make an order in the extended terms sought by the HSE directing the two banks concerned be directed to permit all inquiries be made regarding the man's accounts and allowing the guardian ad litem take all steps considered necessary. The proceedings were returned into early September. The man concerned cannot be identified by order of the court.
Sunday World
8 hours ago
- Sunday World
Conor McGregor claims he will not pay James Lawrence's legal costs after appeal dismissed
The former UFC champion said you are 'out of your f**king mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs' on social media. Conor McGregor has denied that he will be paying the legal costs of James Lawrence in a bizarre and lengthy rant posted on his social media. On Thursday, the Court of Appeal dismissed McGregor's challenge to the outcome of a civil rape case Nikita Hand won against him last year. McGregor's friend Mr Lawrence, who was also sued by Ms Hand but was found by a jury not to have raped her, also appealed against a High Court decision not to award him costs. This was also rejected by the Court of Appeal, which cited evidence in the trial that McGregor was paying his friend's costs. The three judges said that if Mr Lawrence was awarded costs and repaid his friend, then Ms Hand would ultimately be making payments 'to the man who raped her', referring to McGregor. If he did not, he would be awarded a 'bounty' for his troubles. James Lawrence. Photo: Collins On Friday, McGregor hit back at the idea that he would be paying the legal fees of Mr Lawrence. In bizarre and lengthy post on X, the 37-year-old said: 'He was awarded his clearance in a civil trial but he was not awarded his costs! How incredibly wrong! "To be accused of rape, win your innocence, and then be hit with the colossal bill of your defense while the lawyers and accuser who done the case against you, and lost, get their money. I don't think I have ever heard the likes of this. 'You are out of your f**king mind if you think I am paying James Lawrence legal costs, folks. Who said I was paying his fees? "I said I didn't know if I was, when the accuser's barrister asked me on the stand, as I didn't (who is paying his own fees I should have asked him at that time).' Conor McGregor News in 90 Seconds, Friday August 1 Ms Hand sued the MMA fighter for damages for raping her at the Beacon Hotel on December 9, 2018. Last November, a jury of eight women and four men found that McGregor (37) civilly liable for the assault and awarded her almost €250,000 in damages. McGregor's online rant then went on to criticise his own legal team over the decision to withdraw two witnesses from the appeal after they came forward alleging they had new evidence from the night Ms Hand said she was raped by McGregor. McGregor had asked the Court of Appeal to allow in new claims that Ms Hand was punched and kicked by her then partner just hours after she says she was raped by McGregor in 2018. However, the allegations, made by Samantha O'Reilly and Steven Cummins, former neighbours of Ms Hand, were dramatically withdrawn as a ground of appeal on the morning the case opened in July. Mark Mulholland KC, for McGregor, linked the decision to difficulty his side said they would have introducing a report from former Northern Ireland state pathologist Professor Jack Crane, which purportedly supported Ms O'Reilly's account. Ms Hand's counsel John Gordon said his side was in 'shock' at the late withdrawal of the fresh evidence application. Mr Gordon then said the matter should be referred to the DPP for perjury by the witnesses, as well as subornation of perjury by McGregor. He said the part of the appeal withdrawn by McGregor was not just an attempt to introduce further evidence, but was designed to undermine Ms Hand's reputation. Mr Gordon said his client had put in a sworn statement in reply, in which she had 'called it out as lies'. The three-judge court later said it intended to refer the matter to the DPP amid the allegations of perjury. Regarding the decision to withdraw the witnesses from his appeal, McGregor said on X: "Why these two witnesses were not called, I will never know. It was on the very morning of. They were present and very eager to testify. "It seemed they were pulled out of fear from my appointed team [to be honest]. For what I don't know. These people said they seen something, let us all hear. "If it's legit, great, it sounds very legit to me. If it's not, it's on them.' Nikita Hand speaks after the hearing of Conor McGregor's failed appeal. Photo: Collins The Court of Appeal rejected all grounds of appeal advanced by McGregor and dismissed it in its entirety. On the argument around the issue paper, the judges said it is "simply unreal" to suggest that any juror could have been confused by the wording when the issue was "framed in a clear way" by the trial judge when he spoke of intentional and non-consensual contact. This ground of appeal was rejected. The court also said it was satisfied that the potential prejudice to McGregor in relation to his "no comment" answers being put to the jury was not established. "The real risk of an unfair trial has not been demonstrated" Justice Brian O'Moore said in relation to this ground of appeal as he rejected it. Speaking outside court after the ruling, Ms Hand thanked her legal team, the rape crisis centre, and three judges of the appeal court. 'I'm deeply grateful for everyone who supported me, believed in me and stood by my side during this long and painful journey. 'This appeal has retraumatised me over and over again. 'Being forced to relive it, what has happened has had a huge impact on me. 'For every survivor out there, I know how hard it is but please don't be silent, you deserve to be heard, you also deserve justice. 'Today I can finally move on and try to heal. Thank you.'
