Danske Bank A/S v Coyne and Anor (Approved) [2026] IEHC 271 (01 May 2026)

Danske Bank A/S v Coyne and Anor (Approved) [2026] IEHC 271 (01 May 2026)

The right to challenge the judgment underlying Mr Coyne's bankruptcy vested in the Official Assignee upon adjudication, and the cause of action was not personal but related to the estate. Mr Coyne lacked locus standi to bring the application. Even if he could apply for annulment under s.85C, he failed to show 'extremely compelling reasons' for annulment, especially given the long delay after discharge and absence of new evidence or explanation for the delay. Constitutional and ECHR rights were not infringed by this statutory scheme.

Citation
[2026] IEHC 271
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Danske Bank A/S; Defendant/applicant: Seamus Coyne; Notice Party: Gerard Gill, Official Assignee in Bankruptcy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
01 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial; Bankruptcy / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Annul Bankruptcy; High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Locus Standi of Bankrupts, Annulment of Bankruptcy, Setting Aside Judgments, Vesting of Causes of Action in Official Assignee, Delay in Seeking Annulment, Personal Vs Estate Rights in Bankruptcy
Bankruptcy Commercial Law Civil Procedure Locus Standi of Bankrupts Annulment of Bankruptcy Setting Aside Judgments Vesting of Causes of Action in Official Assignee Delay in Seeking Annulment +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Danske Bank A/S

Plaintiff/respondent

Seamus Coyne

Defendant/applicant

Gerard Gill, Official Assignee in Bankruptcy

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial; Bankruptcy / Application to Set Aside Judgment and Annul Bankruptcy; High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a discharged bankrupt has locus standi to set aside a judgment underlying his bankruptcy
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to seek annulment of bankruptcy under s.85C of the Bankruptcy Act 1988
  3. 3 Whether the application meets the 'extremely compelling reasons' threshold for annulment

Ratio Decidendi

The right to challenge the judgment underlying Mr Coyne's bankruptcy vested in the Official Assignee upon adjudication, and the cause of action was not personal but related to the estate. Mr Coyne lacked locus standi to bring the application. Even if he could apply for annulment under s.85C, he failed to show 'extremely compelling reasons' for annulment, especially given the long delay after discharge and absence of new evidence or explanation for the delay. Constitutional and ECHR rights were not infringed by this statutory scheme.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to set aside judgment refused
  • Application for annulment of bankruptcy refused