Tenant eviction case could cost thousands to resolve — Judge

'THIS will cost thousands,' a Judge warned when he decided at Tuam Civil District Court that a dispute between a landowner and a tenant would have to be resolved at Circuit Court level. Judge Geoffrey Browne warned both parties that it would cost them both dearly if their dispute has to ironed out in a higher Court.[private] 'It's better and far cheaper to manage these matters in the District Court but we only deal with small matters, this, I'm afraid, is a complex one and it's for greater legal brains than mine to decide on it,' the Judge said. The plaintiff (landowner) Martin Keville, Kilconly, took the action against Margaret Conlisk, Kilconly (tenant). Tony Canney solr. (for Conlisk) explained that at the heart of the case was a landowner who wanted a tenant off leased land. His client had initially leased the land for tillage. After six years the lease was due for renewal. A new lease was drawn up by an auctioneer and the tenant signed it. Considerable expense had gone into ploughing and re-seeding the land but one year after the new lease was signed, the owner notified his tenant that she had to vacate the land. â€ËœGrazing only' clause In the second lease there was a clause inserted which stated that the land could be used for 'grazing only'. This, it was argued, was a fundamental difference. After seven years leasing, the tenant was told to go. Tony Canney said his client believed the landlord wanted the land back for hay. The question which now may have to be decided at Circuit Court level is whether the 'grazing only' clause inserted in the second six-year lease means the tenant can legally be evicted for continuing to engage in tillage farming. Mr Canney argued that the tenants had carried out tillage farming for six years throughout the duration of the original lease, without any problems or objections from the landlord. This was the only reason they leased the land in the first place. They understood that they were renewing the original lease, under the same conditions, and the 'grazing only' clause took them unawares. The landlord, represented by Joe Fahy solr, argued that by engaging in tillage, the tenant has breached the terms of their lease and he wants to evict them. Judge Browne struck out the case and said the parties would have to bring the matter to the Circuit Court if they wanted to take it further. The Herald understands that since the Court sitting the parties are resolving their differences and it is expected the case will not bother the Circuit Court. [/private]