The Supreme Court has dismissed an application to hear an appeal against a lower court's decision to appoint a receiver over a Dublin property deemed to have been acquired with the proceeds of crime.
In 2019, following an application by the Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB), the High Court held that assets, including a house at Casement Drive, Finglas, Dublin, were the proceeds of crime.
The court held that the house, as well as the other items including a quantity of cash, were beneficially owned by alleged illegal drug trafficker Jason Boyle, but were registered in the names of his parents Laurence (Larry) and Rosaleen Boyle, of Coolebrook Cottages, Finglas West, to conceal their son's involvement.
The Boyles opposed the application and had rejected CAB's claims that the assets were acquired in part or in full by monies derived from Jason Boyle, who denies he is involved in trafficking drugs.
In 2016 CAB, represented in the court proceedings by Michael Binchy Bl, secured freezing orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act against the Boyles in respect of various assets, including the three-bedroom house at Casement Drive.
CAB claimed that Jason Boyle lived at the property, with an estimated worth of €250,000 after it had been extensively renovated after being purchased in 2013.
One of the bedrooms, converted into a walk-in closet, had a Jacuzzi and a sauna installed, while high-end electronics, including a 65in TV and a surround sound system, had been bought.
The kitchen had also been extended and bulletproof glass had also been installed, CAB also alleged.
Representing themselves in the proceedings, the Boyles had claimed that the property was acquired for €70,000 in 2013 with a €60,000 loan from Ms Boyle's father.
Ms Justice Carmel Stewart rejected the Boyles' claims and after deeming the property and other items the proceeds of crime, appointed Kevin McMeel, CAB's legal officer, as receiver of the house.
The High Court's decision to appoint a receiver was appealed to the Court of Appeal, which last January dismissed the Boyles' appeal.
The Boyles then sought to have their appeal - aimed at overturning the receiver's appointment - considered by the Supreme Court.
In a written determination, the Supreme Court, comprised of Mr Justice Donal O'Donnell, Mr Justice Peter Charleton and Ms Justice Mary Irvine, dismissed the Boyles' appeal.