MUCK ON THE DRIVEWAY, UNDERWEAR ON THE LINE AND FLURRY OF LEGAL LETTERS

BETWEEN the muck left on the driveway and the underwear taken off the clothes line, the solicitors’ letters were flying. This was rural Ireland, ‘the country’, as Bernard Condon, SC for the defence put it, and farmers’ disputes of this nature weren’t unusual.

It had all kicked off in December 2012 when Mary Lowry ‘reluctantly’ instructed her solicitor, Aidan Leahy, to write to Patrick Quirke on her behalf.

There were a number of matters which had continued to cause his client ‘considerable concern for some time’ and she wanted to end Mr Quirke’s lease of her farm.

Furthermore, noted Mr Leahy’s letter, the intruder alarm at Ms Lowry’s house had gone off on a number of occasions. While Ms Lowry was not making any allegations, she did report it to gardaí. Also, Mr Quirke was spotted on CCTV, interfering with her letterbox, looking through her windows and interfering with items on her clothes line.

The letter asked Mr Quirke to refrain from entering the property and confine his activity to the ‘farm vicinity’ during daylight hours.

Mr Quirke replied on January 2, 2013, saying the letter contained many inaccuracies and insinuations ‘that I am not going to comment on or clarify for your benefit’.

‘My mother-in-law resides there,’ he said in relation to the property at Fawnagown, adding that she looked forward to his visits.

HE would consider the termination of the lease, he wrote, if compensation was offered. This would take into account the ‘forced sale’ of his cows and the ‘obvious loss of income’.

In a further draft letter, which was ultimately never sent, Mr Leahy noted that his client had said Mr Quirke was driving machinery across her driveway and, as a result, bringing muck across it.

‘There is no reason for you to use our client’s driveway,’ noted the draft.

Neither had he been closing the gate, another thing that was annoying Ms Lowry.

By March, Mr Quirke had instructed a solicitor to correspond on his behalf. In a letter to Mr Leahy, he said that relations between Mr Quirke and Mary Lowry had ‘deteriorated considerably’ and that Mr Quirke ‘regrets this deeply’.

He did not want relations to deteriorate further and was prepared to surrender the letting agreement and forgo any compensation.

A further letter from Mr Leahy suggested July 3 as the date for termination and that there was ‘no difficulty’ in Mr Quirke visiting his mother-in-law as long as the visits were ‘confined for that purpose only.’

After Mr Quirke agreed to leave, his solicitor sent a deed of surrender to Mr Leahy.

However, the matter, and the letter-writing, was far from over.

Further correspondence from Mary Lowry’s solicitor in June noted that the tanks on the farm had not been emptied and that this must be done ‘before the vacate date.’

On September 18, 2013, again via solicitor’s letter, Mr Quirke was informed that there was €3,050 outstanding on the lease.

MR QUIRKE’S response, dated September 24, was to the point. It noted that there were ‘no payments due’ to Mary Lowry and that the tanks had been left full because this is how they were found when the lease commenced.

In a closing salvo read into court, Mr Quirke’s solicitor had also written to Mr Leahy to warn Ms Lowry about her alleged ‘recent’ verbal attack on Mr Quirke.

The letter alleged that Mary Lowry had made a ‘serious allegation’ against Mr Quirke in the presence of his mother-in-law and son during a visit to Fawnagown.

‘That this would not be tolerated,’ warned Mr Quirke’s solicitor.