Waterford Credit Union v J & E Davy [2020] IESC 9 (24 March 2020)

Waterford Credit Union v J & E Davy [2020] IESC 9 (24 March 2020)

The Supreme Court held that the ISE Reports were relevant and necessary for discovery as they related to systemic issues in Davy's advice to credit unions on CMS bonds, which was central to Waterford's claim. The Court found that the breach of the implied undertaking by Waterford's solicitor, while serious, did not justify refusing discovery to Waterford itself, as the breach was not by the party but by its agent in separate proceedings. The interests of justice and fair disposal of the case outweighed the breach, and confidentiality concerns did not override the necessity for discovery.

Citation
[2020] IESC 9
Parties
Plaintiff / Appellant: Waterford Credit Union; Defendant / Respondent: J & E Davy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; discovery of ISE Reports ordered
Legal Topics
Discovery in Civil Litigation, Implied Undertaking in Discovery, Confidentiality of Regulatory Documents, Breach of Statutory Duty, Investment Advice Liability
Civil Procedure Banking and Finance Law Discovery in Civil Litigation Implied Undertaking in Discovery Confidentiality of Regulatory Documents Breach of Statutory Duty Investment Advice 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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Waterford Credit Union

Plaintiff / Appellant

J & E Davy

Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ISE Reports are relevant and necessary for discovery under O. 31, r. 12 RSC
  2. 2 Whether a court has discretion to refuse discovery due to a solicitor's breach of the implied undertaking in separate proceedings
  3. 3 Scope and consequences of the implied undertaking in discovery

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the ISE Reports were relevant and necessary for discovery as they related to systemic issues in Davy's advice to credit unions on CMS bonds, which was central to Waterford's claim. The Court found that the breach of the implied undertaking by Waterford's solicitor, while serious, did not justify refusing discovery to Waterford itself, as the breach was not by the party but by its agent in separate proceedings. The interests of justice and fair disposal of the case outweighed the breach, and confidentiality concerns did not override the necessity for discovery.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; discovery of ISE Reports ordered

Orders

  • Davy to make discovery of the ISE Reports to Waterford Credit Union
  • Costs to be determined