A couple whose illegally built home in Co Meath has been demolished have sworn before the High Court not to interfere with further works aimed at restoring the site to agricultural land.
Chris Murray, also known as Michael Murray, told Judge Richard Humphreys on Monday that he was a resident of the house at Faughan Hill, Bohermeen, until the week before last.
“It was my property until it was flattened the other day,” he said, adding that it was now “just a ball of rubble”.
His wife, Rose Murray, said the house was no longer their property as it was “a ball of rubble”.
READ MORE
The luxury home was built 20 years ago without planning permission after Meath County Council turned down an application to build a house half the size.
On Monday, in addition to undertaking not to interfere with the council’s works at the site, the couple also gave sworn undertakings to assist a Garda investigation into alleged threats made by unidentified third parties to a subcontractor and a security firm earlier this month.
Those companies were engaged to assist in relation to the council’s demolition of the house, but ceased work there following the alleged threats, the court heard on Monday.
Chris Murray said “no threats came from me”. He said he had told a skip owner, when the latter contacted him saying he was very upset skips were going on to the property, to send the skips in.
“I want the mess gone, I want to get out of court with my wife,” he said.
Addressing barrister Deirdre Hughes, for the council, he said the recent events at the property had an “unbelievable” impact on two of his adult children.
Referring to the council gaining access to the property on foot of a court order on March 16th, he said his children were “dragged” by masked men from their kitchen table while having breakfast.
Murray said he did not make any contact with a security company that had worked on the site.
The undertakings were provided on Monday afternoon as a condition of the judge discharging an attachment order under which the couple were arrested outside the Four Courts on Monday to appear before High Court to answer the judge’s March 9th finding of contempt against them.
The council sought the couple’s attachment after arguing they were in contempt of earlier undertakings to provide vacant possession of the house so the council could demolish it.
The judge adjourned separate applications by the Murrays in which they deny contempt of those undertakings, provided by them in 2020 with a stay to September 2022.
Their solicitor, Neil McNelis, argued the council’s contempt proceedings were aimed at “undermining” the couple’s separate application to the European Court of Human Rights alleging violations of their rights. In court documents, the couple said they had suffered irreparable harm and personal trauma, he said.
After exchanges between the parties and the judge, the sides agreed that the attachment order could be discharged on the couple’s sworn undertakings and the Murray’s separate applications could be adjourned.
In making those orders, the judge said he saw no basis for McNelis’s contention that the council’s contempt proceedings undermined the Murray’s application to the European court.
The council’s actions were all done “with the blessing of the court”, he said.
The judge said he “just works here” and does not “make the rules”. The Supreme Court had ruled that the house should be demolished and the site be restored to agricultural use, he noted. He said he had last week ordered a speedy demolition because he was concerned the situation might escalate if the matter dragged on.
The court heard evidence from Det Garda Mark Looby, and a witness on behalf of the council, concerning threats made by unidentified callers to a haulage company and a security firm. Both companies had since ceased work on the site, the court heard.
[ Ruins of Meath house should be preserved as a monument to Celtic Tiger hubrisOpens in new window ]
Looby said a haulage subcontractor received a phone call on March 20th at 1.30pm from a man with a Northern accent advising him not to have anything to do with taking rubble from the site.
The caller said that if a person called “the Bull” heard anything about him taking rubble away from the house, there would be “nothing left” of the subcontractor’s own house, the witness said.
Looby said no written complaints were made to the force concerning the threats.
McNelis said it was of no benefit to his clients for third parties to engage in criminality and they “totally dissociated” themselves from such acts.
His clients were “extremely distressed” and were outside the country at the time of the events alleged.
His clients denied contempt but were reluctant to give evidence because that could compromise other issues they wanted to raise, including their contention they had not breached the undertakings, he said. He asked the judge to read a lengthy affidavit in which the couple denied any breach of the undertakings.
