Fortberry Ltd & Anor v Allied Irish Bank PLC & Ors (Approved) [2024] IECA 271 (18 November 2024)

Fortberry Ltd & Anor v Allied Irish Bank PLC & Ors (Approved) [2024] IECA 271 (18 November 2024)

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court was correct in finding the Bank had a prima facie defence to the pleaded claims, as the statement of claim did not challenge the validity of the assignment or the appointment of the receiver beyond what was addressed. The Bank's evidence and the pleadings established a reasonable prospect of a defence at trial. The amount of security for costs was properly assessed and discounted to reflect the circumstances. There was no basis to interfere with the High Court's order.

Citation
[2024] IECA 271
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Fortberry Limited; Appellant/plaintiff: James Flynn; Respondent/defendant: Allied Irish Banks PLC; Respondent/defendant: Shane McCarthy; Respondent/defendant: Everyday Finance DAC
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order for Security for Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Assignment of Debt, Appointment of Receiver, Mortgage Enforcement, Prima Facie Defence, Quantum of Security
Civil Procedure Company Law Banking Law Security for Costs Assignment of Debt Appointment of Receiver Mortgage Enforcement Prima Facie Defence +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fortberry Limited

Appellant/plaintiff

James Flynn

Appellant/plaintiff

Allied Irish Banks PLC

Respondent/defendant

Shane McCarthy

Respondent/defendant

Everyday Finance DAC

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in finding the Bank had a prima facie defence to the action for purposes of ordering security for costs
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in fixing the amount of security for costs
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings supported a challenge to the validity of the assignment of loans and security

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the High Court was correct in finding the Bank had a prima facie defence to the pleaded claims, as the statement of claim did not challenge the validity of the assignment or the appointment of the receiver beyond what was addressed. The Bank's evidence and the pleadings established a reasonable prospect of a defence at trial. The amount of security for costs was properly assessed and discounted to reflect the circumstances. There was no basis to interfere with the High Court's order.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court affirmed
  • Security for costs fixed at €198,147.40