Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd -v- Quinn & ors [2014] IESC 11 (26 February 2014)

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd -v- Quinn & ors [2014] IESC 11 (26 February 2014)

Where there is no dispute as to the substance of a settlement, the Supreme Court may ensure that the form of its order accurately and unambiguously reflects the agreement, including by adding express directions for clarity, even if not repeated in the draft order, as the form of the order is ultimately a matter for the court.

Citation
[2014] IESC 11
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited; Plaintiff/respondent: Quinn Investments Sweden AB; Plaintiff/respondent: Leif Baecklund; Defendant/appellant: Sean Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Ciara Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Colette Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Sean Quinn Jnr; Defendant/appellant: Brenda Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Aoife Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Stephen Kelly; Defendant/appellant: Peter Darragh Quinn; Defendant/appellant: Niall McPartland; Defendant/appellant: Indian Trust AB; Defendant/appellant: Forfar Overseas AS; Defendant/appellant: Lockerbie Investments AS; Defendant/appellant: Clonmore Investments AS; Defendant/appellant: Marfine Investments Limited; Defendant/appellant: Blandun Enterprises Limited; Defendant/appellant: Mecon FZE; Defendant/appellant: CJSC Vneshkonsalt; Defendant/appellant: OOO Striotelnye Tekhnologii; Defendant/appellant: OOO RLC Development; Defendant/appellant: Karen Woods
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
26 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Determination of Appeal Regarding Form of Consent Order
Outcome
Appeal resolved by consent; order to be made in terms proposed by the Receivers, including the express direction.
Legal Topics
Settlement Enforcement, Legal Professional Privilege, Court Orders—form and Substance, Receivership
Civil Procedure Banking Law Settlement Enforcement Legal Professional Privilege Court Orders—form and Substance Receivership

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited

Plaintiff/respondent

Quinn Investments Sweden AB

Plaintiff/respondent

Leif Baecklund

Plaintiff/respondent

Sean Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Ciara Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Colette Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Sean Quinn Jnr

Defendant/appellant

Brenda Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Aoife Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Stephen Kelly

Defendant/appellant

Peter Darragh Quinn

Defendant/appellant

Niall McPartland

Defendant/appellant

Indian Trust AB

Defendant/appellant

Forfar Overseas AS

Defendant/appellant

Lockerbie Investments AS

Defendant/appellant

Clonmore Investments AS

Defendant/appellant

Marfine Investments Limited

Defendant/appellant

Blandun Enterprises Limited

Defendant/appellant

Mecon FZE

Defendant/appellant

CJSC Vneshkonsalt

Defendant/appellant

OOO Striotelnye Tekhnologii

Defendant/appellant

OOO RLC Development

Defendant/appellant

Karen Woods

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Determination of Appeal Regarding Form of Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Supreme Court can determine the form of a consent order where parties dispute its terms
  2. 2 Whether omission of an express direction in a draft order affects the substance of the parties' agreement
  3. 3 Whether the court can ensure clarity and accuracy in its orders even where parties have agreed

Ratio Decidendi

Where there is no dispute as to the substance of a settlement, the Supreme Court may ensure that the form of its order accurately and unambiguously reflects the agreement, including by adding express directions for clarity, even if not repeated in the draft order, as the form of the order is ultimately a matter for the court.

Court Disposition

Appeal resolved by consent; order to be made in terms proposed by the Receivers, including the express direction.

Orders

  • Order includes an express direction in the terms of paragraph 4 of the original High Court notice of motion.