Dowling & Ors -v- The Minister for Finance [2014] IEHC 595 (18 December 2014)

Dowling & Ors -v- The Minister for Finance [2014] IEHC 595 (18 December 2014)

The plaintiffs have an arguable case, but so does the defendant. The direction order is valid unless set aside, and the Minister's exercise of shareholding rights is necessary for the bank's recapitalisation and regulatory compliance. The risk of injustice is greater if the injunction is granted, as it could...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] IEHC 595
Parties
Plaintiff: Gerard Dowling; Plaintiff: Padraig McManus; Plaintiff: Piotr Skoczylas; Defendant: The Minister for Finance; Notice Party: Permanent TSB (Group Holdings) PLC; Notice Party: Permanent TSB
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Injunction (interlocutory Relief) / High Court Judgment on Application for Interlocutory Injunction Pending CJEU Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction refused.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Shareholder Rights, Credit Institutions (stabilisation) Act, Second Company Law Directive, Adequacy of Damages, Effective Remedy Under EU Law
Company Law Banking Law European Union Law Equity Interlocutory Injunctions Shareholder Rights Credit Institutions (stabilisation) Act Second Company Law Directive +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerard Dowling

Plaintiff

Padraig McManus

Plaintiff

Piotr Skoczylas

Plaintiff

The Minister for Finance

Defendant

Permanent TSB (Group Holdings) PLC

Notice Party

Permanent TSB

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Application for Injunction (interlocutory Relief) / High Court Judgment on Application for Interlocutory Injunction Pending CJEU Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant interlocutory injunction restraining the Minister for Finance from disposing of or exercising voting rights in shares in Permanent TSB Group Holdings plc pending CJEU ruling
  2. 2 Whether damages are an adequate remedy for the plaintiffs
  3. 3 Whether refusal of injunction would render the substantive proceedings moot and deprive plaintiffs of an effective remedy

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs have an arguable case, but so does the defendant. The direction order is valid unless set aside, and the Minister's exercise of shareholding rights is necessary for the bank's recapitalisation and regulatory compliance. The risk of injustice is greater if the injunction is granted, as it could jeopardise the bank's capital plan, regulatory status, and public investment. Damages are available and constitute an adequate remedy for the plaintiffs. The proceedings will not become moot as the Minister undertook not to raise mootness. Therefore, the balance of justice does not favour granting the injunction.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction refused.

Orders

  • Reliefs sought by the plaintiffs are refused.