Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd -v- Halpin [2014] IECA 3 (10 December 2014)

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd -v- Halpin [2014] IECA 3 (10 December 2014)

The Court refused substitution of Kenmare for IBRC as plaintiff/respondent at appeal stage because the judgments under appeal were granted to IBRC, which alone established entitlement at the relevant dates; Kenmare had no entitlement then. However, Kenmare was added as a second plaintiff and respondent due to its material interest, with restriction to arguments advanced by IBRC in the High Court or on appeal based on evidence before the High Court.

Citation
[2014] IECA 3
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited (in special liquidation); Defendant/appellant: Patrick Halpin; Applicant/second Plaintiff/respondent: Kenmare Property Finance Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
10 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Substitute or Add Party at Appeal Stage
Outcome
Application for substitution refused; application to add Kenmare as party granted.
Legal Topics
Party Substitution, Assignment of Rights, Appellate Jurisdiction, Joinder of Parties
Civil Procedure Banking Law Party Substitution Assignment of Rights Appellate Jurisdiction Joinder of Parties

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited (in special liquidation)

Plaintiff/respondent

Patrick Halpin

Defendant/appellant

Kenmare Property Finance Limited

Applicant/second Plaintiff/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application to Substitute or Add Party at Appeal Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Kenmare Property Finance Limited should be substituted for IBRC as plaintiff/respondent at appeal stage
  2. 2 Whether Kenmare should be added as a party to the appeal
  3. 3 Validity of assignment of rights from IBRC to Kenmare

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused substitution of Kenmare for IBRC as plaintiff/respondent at appeal stage because the judgments under appeal were granted to IBRC, which alone established entitlement at the relevant dates; Kenmare had no entitlement then. However, Kenmare was added as a second plaintiff and respondent due to its material interest, with restriction to arguments advanced by IBRC in the High Court or on appeal based on evidence before the High Court.

Court Disposition

Application for substitution refused; application to add Kenmare as party granted.

Orders

  • Kenmare Property Finance Limited added as second plaintiff and respondent to the appeal, restricted to arguments advanced by IBRC.
  • Consequential order amending title to proceedings.