In the recent decision of Barrington v AG & Ors [2026] IEHC 404 (“Barrington”), the Irish High Court has provided guidance on the level of force an owner of commercial property can take to recover their property.
Key Takeaway: Commercial property owners may use a degree of force to retake possession
The High Court has confirmed that owners can use a degree of force, including breaking glass and cutting through steel shutters or doors, to recover possession of commercial property provided that there is no person inside the property at the time of entry and there is “no Landlord and Tenant dimension”.
Background to the commercial property possession dispute
A commercial warehouse was owned and occupied by the Barringtons, a married couple. They pledged the warehouse as security for a loan facility which they ultimately defaulted on. A receiver was subsequently appointed to the premises.
In 2022, the warehouse was sold by the receiver to MRCS Ltd. MRCS Ltd issued correspondence via its solicitor requesting that the Barringtons deliver up vacant possession. The Barringtons refused to do so. MRCS Ltd issued further correspondence warning that it would “take whatever steps may be available to it to secure vacant possession of the premises, including (but not limited to) obtaining peaceable possession of the premises”. Nonetheless, the Barringtons remained in occupation.
MRCS Ltd’s agents took possession of the warehouse on the morning of 9 April 2025 by effecting “forcible entry” by breaking glass, cutting through steel shutters and welding shut all external doors. The Barringtons were not on the premises at the time and were later denied access.
The Barringtons sought: (i) an injunction preventing “any further loss or damage” to the property and preventing the property being sold or being offered for sale; and (ii) an order directing MRCS Ltd “to return possession” of the property to them. Their arguments included that: (i) they were never in default of the loan; (ii) their constitutional rights were infringed; and (iii) the transfer of the loan facility and related security to Promontoria (as the original lender’s successor) and the exercise of a power of sale by the receiver was invalid such that MRCS Ltd did not acquire good title to the premises. MRCS Ltd argued that, as the properly registered owner, it was merely taking lawful possession by using force to access its own property.
High Court judgment on forcible entry and recovery of possession
The Court refused the injunction sought in circumstances where it was satisfied that MRCS Ltd had acquired good title to the premises and that consequently its actions to retake the premises were valid. In respect of the “forcible entry”, the Court referred to “forcible entry legislation and the authorities concerning Landlord and Tenant disputes” in expressing its concern over people taking the law into their own hands. However, the absence of a Landlord and Tenant relationship, the commercial nature of the premises, and the fact that the premises was unoccupied at the time when possession was taken, all supported the conclusion that the owner was justified in exercising “that degree of force”.
Contact us
If you have any queries about anything discussed in this insight, please contact Ruadhán Kenny, Aidan Doran or Rebecca McKittrick. Visit our Disputes and Investigations page stay up to date with the latest updates, articles and briefing notes.
