Launceston Property Finance Designated Activity Company v Wright (Approved) (Rev 1) [2019] IECA 324 (18 December 2019)

Launceston Property Finance Designated Activity Company v Wright (Approved) (Rev 1) [2019] IECA 324 (18 December 2019)

The Court found that the High Court judge correctly applied the principles for summary judgment, that there was no basis for recusal or adjournment, that the hearing was fair, that the assignment of the debt was sufficiently proven, and that the amount for which judgment was granted was properly calculated and credited. No bona fide defence was raised by the appellant to the sum awarded.

Citation
[2019] IECA 324
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Launceston Property Finance Designated Activity Company; Defendant/appellant: David Wright
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Summary Judgment Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Loan Facility, Summary Judgment, Assignment of Debt, Recusal, Adjournment, Proof of Debt, Plenary Hearing
Banking Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Loan Facility Summary Judgment Assignment of Debt Recusal Adjournment +2 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

Launceston Property Finance Designated Activity Company

Plaintiff/respondent

David Wright

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Summary Judgment Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in granting summary judgment against the appellant for €1,742,842.27 and remitting the balance to plenary hearing
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge should have recused himself or adjourned the proceedings due to alleged apprehended bias
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the hearing denied the appellant a fair trial

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the High Court judge correctly applied the principles for summary judgment, that there was no basis for recusal or adjournment, that the hearing was fair, that the assignment of the debt was sufficiently proven, and that the amount for which judgment was granted was properly calculated and credited. No bona fide defence was raised by the appellant to the sum awarded.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed granting summary judgment for €1,742,842.27 and remitting balance to plenary hearing.