Member Login

Trial judge correctly applied principles when granting order for summary judgement

By: Colm Scott Byrne BL

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

Court of Appeal dismisses appeal and affirms decision of the High Court granting judgement against the appellant in the sum of €1,742,842.27 and remitted the balance of the plaintiff's claim to plenary hearing, on the grounds that: (a) there was no fault in the reasons advanced by the trial judge for refusing to recuse himself from entertaining the application or with his refusal of appellant’s adjournment application; (b) the trial judge did not err in law or in the manner in which he exercised his discretion when he refused to adjourn the proceedings to await the outcome of the appellant's appeal in other proceedings which indirectly concerned the same loan agreement and which had been brought by the receiver; (c) the extent of the interruptions by the trial judge during the course of the hearing were minimal and were directed to clarifying the issues and insofar as questions were asked they the class of questions which are common place in such applications and could not have adversely interfered with the presentation of the case; (d) there was no substance to the appellant’s contention that the judgement entered against him in the High Court should be set aside because of any insufficiency in the proofs as to the assignment of his liability by the lending bank to the respondent; and (e) the appellant failed to show any defence in law to the portion of the claim to which the trial judge granted summary judgement.

McCarthy J (nem diss): Appeal of a decision of the High Court granting judgment against the appellant in the sum of €1,742,842.27 and remitted the balance of the plaintiff's claim to plenary hearing - summary judgment - appellant obtained a loan facility in the amount of €2,252,000 by facility letter dated the 23rd September, 2008 - the said loan was acquired by the respondent on the 23rd May, 2014 - the respondent applied by notice of motion dated the 24th May, 2017 for summary judgment to the sum of €2,553,830.80 together with continuing interest - whether the trial erred in law in failing to recuse himself from engaging with the respondent's application for summary judgment - whether the trial judge erred in law in failing to adjourn the proceedings - whether the appellant had a fair trial - whether the trial judge failed to have regard to what the appellant contends were illegal acts on the part of the lending Bank - whether the trial judge correctly applied the test for granting summary judgment - appeal dismissed.

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 *