Framus Ltd & ors v C.R.H plc & ors [2013] IESC 23 (14 May 2013)

Framus Ltd & ors v C.R.H plc & ors [2013] IESC 23 (14 May 2013)

The Supreme Court held that, in the absence of clear consent or authority from the liquidator, the appeals by the second and third appellants (companies in liquidation) could not lawfully proceed and should be struck out. However, a three-month stay was granted to allow for possible regularisation through the High Court, given the creditors' support and the factual conflict regarding the liquidator's consent.

Citation
[2013] IESC 23
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Framus Limited; Plaintiff/appellant: Amantiss Enterprises Limited (In Liquidation); Plaintiff/appellant: Wilbury Limited (In Liquidation); Defendant/respondent: CRH plc; Defendant/respondent: Irish Cement Limited; Defendant/respondent: Roadstone Provinces Limited; Defendant/respondent: Roadstone Dublin Limited; Defendant/respondent: Tradburn Limited; Defendant/respondent: Readymix plc; Defendant/respondent: Kilsaran Concrete Products Limited; Defendant/respondent: CPI Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
14 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Motion to Strike Out Appeal
Outcome
Appeals of the second and third appellants struck out, with a three-month stay to allow for possible regularisation.
Legal Topics
Authority of Liquidator, Abuse of Process, Appeal Procedure, Costs Liability
Insolvency Civil Procedure Authority of Liquidator Abuse of Process Appeal Procedure Costs Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Framus Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Amantiss Enterprises Limited (In Liquidation)

Plaintiff/appellant

Wilbury Limited (In Liquidation)

Plaintiff/appellant

CRH plc

Defendant/respondent

Irish Cement Limited

Defendant/respondent

Roadstone Provinces Limited

Defendant/respondent

Roadstone Dublin Limited

Defendant/respondent

Tradburn Limited

Defendant/respondent

Readymix plc

Defendant/respondent

Kilsaran Concrete Products Limited

Defendant/respondent

CPI Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Motion to Strike Out Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appeals by companies in liquidation can proceed without liquidator's consent
  2. 2 Whether appeals filed without such consent are a nullity and should be struck out
  3. 3 Whether costs can be awarded against a director/shareholder for unauthorized appeals

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that, in the absence of clear consent or authority from the liquidator, the appeals by the second and third appellants (companies in liquidation) could not lawfully proceed and should be struck out. However, a three-month stay was granted to allow for possible regularisation through the High Court, given the creditors' support and the factual conflict regarding the liquidator's consent.

Court Disposition

Appeals of the second and third appellants struck out, with a three-month stay to allow for possible regularisation.

Orders

  • Appeals of Amantiss Enterprises Limited and Wilbury Limited struck out, with a three-month stay.
  • Liberty to apply for extension of time or to regularise authority within three months, subject to conditions.