Member Login

Proceedings challenging the acquisition by NAMA of bank loans are statute barred

By: Colm Scott Byrne BL

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

Court of Appeal allows appeal against a decision of the High Court striking out part of the respondents' claim against the appellant and strikes out the claim in its entirety, on the grounds that: the proceedings were instituted after the expiration of the longest limitation period that could be applicable to this claim, being more than six years after the 17th December, 2010 and consequently the proceedings are bound to fail.

Noonan J (nem diss): Appeal of a decision of the High Court to strike out in part the respondents/plaintiffs' claim against the appellant/defendant - appellant argued that the proceedings should have beens struck out in their entirety - the proceedings relate to an alleged failure on the appellant’s part to afford the respondents fair procedures during the decision making and acquisition process that led to their loans and associated securities being acquired by the appellant - the proceedings also complain that they did not receive clear and unequivocal reasons for the acquisition in an alleged breach of their legal rights - the loans were transferred to NAMA on 17 December 2010 - proceedings issued on 22 December 2016 - whether the claim was statute barred - Section 11 (2) of the Statute of Limitations 1957 - appeal allowed - Court substitutes order of the High Court for one dismissing proceedings in their entirety.

Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *