Angela Farrell v The Governor and Company of Bank of Ireland & ors [2012] IESC 42 (10 July 2012)

Angela Farrell v The Governor and Company of Bank of Ireland & ors [2012] IESC 42 (10 July 2012)

The Supreme Court held that Ms. Farrell's conduct of the litigation was vexatious and oppressive, amounting to special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs in each of the relevant appeals. The Court found that the balance of justice and the need to protect the respondent from unrecoverable costs warranted the order, and that such an order was a proportionate response given the circumstances.

Citation
[2012] IESC 42
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant/notice Party/appellant: Angela Farrell; Defendant/respondent: The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland; Applicant/respondent: Brian Feeley; Applicant/respondent: Dermot Freehill; Applicant/respondent: Mark Woodcock; Respondent: District Court Judge Bridget Reilly; Respondent: The Judge of the District Court No.9
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
10 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal (multiple Consolidated Appeals) / Supreme Court Determination on Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Vexatious Litigation, Access to Courts, Costs Orders, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Banking Law Security for Costs Vexatious Litigation Access to Courts Costs Orders Abuse of Process

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Farrell

Plaintiff/appellant/notice Party/appellant

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland

Defendant/respondent

Brian Feeley

Applicant/respondent

Dermot Freehill

Applicant/respondent

Mark Woodcock

Applicant/respondent

District Court Judge Bridget Reilly

Respondent

The Judge of the District Court No.9

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (multiple Consolidated Appeals) / Supreme Court Determination on Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against an individual appellant in multiple appeals arising from banking and related proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the litigation by the appellant was vexatious or oppressive so as to constitute special circumstances justifying security for costs
  3. 3 Whether the right of access to the courts and fair process is disproportionately impaired by such an order

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that Ms. Farrell's conduct of the litigation was vexatious and oppressive, amounting to special circumstances justifying an order for security for costs in each of the relevant appeals. The Court found that the balance of justice and the need to protect the respondent from unrecoverable costs warranted the order, and that such an order was a proportionate response given the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted

Orders

  • Ms. Farrell is ordered to provide security for costs in respect of each of the relevant appeals as specified by the Court.