The High Court has granted an injunction requiring that a number of people who have taken over a building in Dublin, where homes for older people are to be provided by a charity, must vacate it within seven days.
The Cabhrú Housing Association was granted the order after the court heard that on May 12th, a number of “unknown persons” broke into the premises at James McSweeney House, Berkeley Street, Dublin.
The building was vacated three years ago for the purpose of redevelopment by Cabhrú to provide 35 modern home units for older citizens of Dublin. The redevelopment was delayed by the pandemic and increased building costs but Cabhrú construction is due to start next year.
The court heard there were serious concerns about safety in the building, given that gas and water had been cut off and the only electrical connection in place was for the alarm. The fire alarm also appeared to have been cut, Cabhrú said.
Michael Harding: I went to the cinema to see Small Things Like These. By the time I emerged I had concluded the film was crap
Look inside: 1950s bungalow transformed into modern five-bed home in Greystones for €1.15m
‘I’m in my early 30s and recently married - but I cannot imagine spending the rest of my life with her’
Karlin Lillington: Big Tech may not get everything it wants from Trump
The case came before Mr Justice Rory Mulcahy on Thursday, when Padraig Drummond appeared on behalf of the “persons unknown” defendants. He said that for the past week he has been advocating on behalf of 46 migrants who are in the building and that he was CEO of a group called Streetlink Homeless Support.
His group has been in direct contact with Minister for Integration Roderic O’Gorman and he was seeking a protection order to be put in place for the building, given protests against migrants around the country and the fact there have been threats made online.
He said that while he has nothing to do with “its acquisition”, he was there for welfare checks with the migrants living there and to ensure there is power and running water.
He tried to engage with the representative of Cabhrú in relation to the fire alarm and, as a result, he asked those in occupation to put in place individuals on each balcony to “fire watch”.
His group was “seeking an amicable resolution for the 46 people there who are in 20 apartments and they are comfortable there”.
Andrew Whelan BL, for Cabhrú, said his client was a private charity, and not the State, which was providing homes for elderly people.
He had every sympathy for the plight of the homeless, but this was not the way to go about getting accommodation for them.
Mr Justice Mulcahy said he had every sympathy for what Mr Drummond was trying to do and even greater sympathy for the 46 migrants because they have nowhere else to go. However, he found the case had been made by the plaintiff.
He asked Mr Whelan if his client could provide a period of time within which the building could be vacated. Following a short break, Mr Whelan said such a decision would have to be taken by the Cabrú board in consultation with its insurers.
The judge said he would grant the order but put a stay on it for seven days and the case will return before him in a week.
When the judge asked Mr Drummond to “do whatever you can do”, Mr Drummond replied: “I have nothing to do with those who have taken control of the building, I have no control over it”.