Everyday Finance DAC & Anor v Lohan (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 246 (11 October 2023)

Everyday Finance DAC & Anor v Lohan (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 246 (11 October 2023)

Appellant failed to return signed facility letter within stipulated and extended periods, so no binding settlement agreement existed. No denial of indebtedness was made. Arguments regarding adequacy of particulars and standing were not raised in the High Court and do not meet the threshold for exceptional admission on appeal. Respondents are properly before the court by consent order. Summary judgment was correctly granted.

Citation
[2023] IECA 246
Parties
Respondent: Allied Irish Banks PLC; Respondent: Everyday Finance DAC; Respondent: AIB Mortgage Bank; Appellant: Cormac Lohan
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
11 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Loan Agreements, Assignment of Debt, Procedural Standing, Adequacy of Pleadings
Banking Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Loan Agreements Assignment of Debt Procedural Standing Adequacy of Pleadings

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allied Irish Banks PLC

Respondent

Everyday Finance DAC

Respondent

AIB Mortgage Bank

Respondent

Cormac Lohan

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had an arguable defence to summary judgment for loan debts
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of debt claimed were adequately pleaded
  3. 3 Whether the respondents had locus standi after assignment of loans

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant failed to return signed facility letter within stipulated and extended periods, so no binding settlement agreement existed. No denial of indebtedness was made. Arguments regarding adequacy of particulars and standing were not raised in the High Court and do not meet the threshold for exceptional admission on appeal. Respondents are properly before the court by consent order. Summary judgment was correctly granted.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for respondents affirmed
  • Appellant to pay costs