22 / 336
ness until July 19th, 1969. From the beginning
difficulties arose and defects became apparent. There
had been no dispute as to the existence of the defects
and their unfortunate consequences.
Mr. Justice Hamilton said the defendants were
extremely unfortunate in this case because the
structural defects which led to the collapse of the
building were due to two separate causes either of
which were capable of being remedied. Due to the com-
bination of the two separate causes, remedial work
was impossible prior to the collapse of the building.
He held that all the defendants were in breach of
duty, either contractually or otherwise, the builder
being liable in law by the breach of duty of its sub-
contractor, Precast Ltd. He was satisfied from the
evidence that the greatest degree of fault must rest
with Precast Ltd. and through it in the builder.
[Lynch v. Beale, Murphy Ltd. and Precast Ltd.—
Hamilton J.—unreported—30th November 1974.]
Defective Judgment Mortgage Affidavit, which did not
correctly describe occupation, rejected.
In March, 1971, the plaintiffs got judgment in the
Circuit Court against A, a third party, for £421 and
£16 costs. In April, 1971, the plaintiffs lodged a copy
of the Circuit Court affidavit in the Registry of Deeds
to convert the judgment into a judgment mortgage.
The affidavit mentioned the Barony and County, but
not the Townland. The third party, A, subsequently
agreed to sell the lands to the defendant. In the
conveyance to A, made in October, 1966 and in a
mortgage made on the same day, the townland of
Balbradagh was mentioned; the mortgage was duly
released to A, discharged from all monies secured on
4th October, 1971.
The solicitors for the purchaser had a hand search
made in the Registry of Deeds against lands "in the
Townland of Balbradagh, in the Barony of Upper
Navan and in the County of Meath". This search
disclosed the mortgage, but not the judgment
mortgage. On 5th October, 1971, A conveyed the said
lands to the purchaser.
The plaintiffs now seek a declaration claiming that
the judgment mortgage of 29th April, 1971 is well
charged on the purchaser's interest in the lands. It
was contended on behalf of the purchaser that the
affidavit did not create a valid judgment mortgage,
because it did not describe the lands to be charged
with sufficient detail, and because A was not a farmer,
though described as such, but was in fact a mechanic.
In considering whether Bobinstown is a "town""
within the Judgment Mortgage Act, 1850, Kenny J.
cited the case law on the subject, and came to the
conclusion that Robinstown was a village. The Act
of 1850 does not require the townland to be stated
in the affidavit — accordingly the description of the
lands in the judgment mortgage affidavit was sufficient.
The next issue is whether the misdecription of A as
a farmer invalidates the affidavit. The case law on
this subject proves that it does, for in
Murphy
v.
Lacey
31 I.L.T.R. 42, Porter M.R. held that where an agri-
cultural labourer was described as a farmer, the
affidavit was invalid. Accordingly an affidavit which
describes a mechanic, who had never been a farmer,
as a farmer, is also invalid. Therefore the plaintiff's
judgment mortgage \yas not effective to create a
mortgage, and a declaration to that effect will be
refused. If the village has not the same name as the
townland in which it is situated, it is essential to
search in the Registry of Deeds against the name of
the village as well as that of the townland.
[Dardis and Dunns Seeds Ltd. v. Hickey—Kenny J.
—unreported—11th July, 1974.]
The Society is about to establish panels of persons
who would be available to examine and comment to
the Society on Parliamentary Bills and draft EEC
Directives and Conventions, according as they become
available. If you are interested in helping the Society
in this way, please write to the Director General,
indicating your area of special interest.
IRISH SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY AND
PRACTICE OF EUROPEAN LAW
The Society's next meeting will be on the 28th Feb-
ruary in the Solicitors' Buildings at 8 p.m. when Mr.
Vincent Grogan, Director in the Directorate General
for Competition of the E.E.C. will talk on "Competition
Policy in the E.E.C." Non members of the Society are
welcome.
20