If you want to understand what "winning" looks like for an accommodation provider, read Akram v RTB [2026] IEHC 273.
https://ww2.courts.ie/view/Judgment...-4798-a070-84a0cd59c99c/2026_IEHC_273.pdf/pdf
The landlord served a notice of termination in June 2023. The tenants disputed it. The landlord won at adjudication, then won at the Tenancy Tribunal (three hearing days) on all five points: notice valid, no unlawful termination, no breach of standards, no breach of quiet enjoyment, no penalisation.
The Tribunal did not mince words about the tenants. It found their credibility "called into question on numerous occasions" and their claims - being "afraid for their lives," facing "dangerous landlords" - an "exaggeration of the facts." It noted their demand for compensation escalating from €500 a month to €40,000, plus demands for "sincere and remorseful recorded apologies," and concluded the case "amounted to an opportunistic strike." It found they "referred to themselves as victims until corrected by the Tribunal," and that their repeated "threat of escalation to the RTB" looked like "coercion by the Tenants rather than penalisation by the landlords." When the landlord explained a registration delay had coincided with "two rounds of surgery and chemotherapy," it was "met with a remarkable lack of empathy." The accomodation providers were accused of "mail tampering, harassment at work or other claims of alleged criminal acts". The Tribunal's conclusion: "it is the Landlords who have suffered the most."
The tenant, a litigant in person, then took it to the High Court on judicial review (including an allegation of bias against the Tribunal). The judge threw that out as "wholly misconceived," with no prospect of success, and took the trouble to warn that accusing a decision-maker of bias "goes to the heart of a person's character" and cannot be inferred simply because a ruling went against you. Leave was granted in March 2026 - nearly three years after the original notice - on three narrow procedural grounds only. The substantive hearing is still to come. The tenants remain in the flat throughout.
So: won at adjudication, won at Tribunal on every point, found to be the exaggerated and wronged party by two separate bodies, seriously ill the whole way - and still no possession, still in court defending a result secured long ago. The tenant risks a court fee and keeps the home at every step. Goodness only knows how long more the process will be dragged out by (it's not going to be measured in weeks anyway).
This is the deal the State offers the people it expects to provide housing
https://ww2.courts.ie/view/Judgment...-4798-a070-84a0cd59c99c/2026_IEHC_273.pdf/pdf
The landlord served a notice of termination in June 2023. The tenants disputed it. The landlord won at adjudication, then won at the Tenancy Tribunal (three hearing days) on all five points: notice valid, no unlawful termination, no breach of standards, no breach of quiet enjoyment, no penalisation.
The Tribunal did not mince words about the tenants. It found their credibility "called into question on numerous occasions" and their claims - being "afraid for their lives," facing "dangerous landlords" - an "exaggeration of the facts." It noted their demand for compensation escalating from €500 a month to €40,000, plus demands for "sincere and remorseful recorded apologies," and concluded the case "amounted to an opportunistic strike." It found they "referred to themselves as victims until corrected by the Tribunal," and that their repeated "threat of escalation to the RTB" looked like "coercion by the Tenants rather than penalisation by the landlords." When the landlord explained a registration delay had coincided with "two rounds of surgery and chemotherapy," it was "met with a remarkable lack of empathy." The accomodation providers were accused of "mail tampering, harassment at work or other claims of alleged criminal acts". The Tribunal's conclusion: "it is the Landlords who have suffered the most."
The tenant, a litigant in person, then took it to the High Court on judicial review (including an allegation of bias against the Tribunal). The judge threw that out as "wholly misconceived," with no prospect of success, and took the trouble to warn that accusing a decision-maker of bias "goes to the heart of a person's character" and cannot be inferred simply because a ruling went against you. Leave was granted in March 2026 - nearly three years after the original notice - on three narrow procedural grounds only. The substantive hearing is still to come. The tenants remain in the flat throughout.
So: won at adjudication, won at Tribunal on every point, found to be the exaggerated and wronged party by two separate bodies, seriously ill the whole way - and still no possession, still in court defending a result secured long ago. The tenant risks a court fee and keeps the home at every step. Goodness only knows how long more the process will be dragged out by (it's not going to be measured in weeks anyway).
This is the deal the State offers the people it expects to provide housing
