Coen & Anor v Doyle & Ors (Approved) [2023] IEHC 310 (21 June 2023)

Coen & Anor v Doyle & Ors (Approved) [2023] IEHC 310 (21 June 2023)

There is a credible factual basis for the claims against the first and third defendants, including evidence of personal involvement and asset transfers; disputed facts require plenary hearing and discovery. The applications to release the defendants are refused as the proceedings are not bound to fail.

Citation
[2023] IEHC 310
Parties
Plaintiff: Patrick Coen; Plaintiff: Ellen Coen; Defendant: Mark Doyle; Defendant: Mark Doyle Building Contractors Limited; Defendant: Ballinagam Upper Consulting Limited T/A Mark Doyle Building Contractors; Defendant: Michael Browne T/A BBA Architecture
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application to Release Defendants From Proceedings
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Piercing Corporate Veil, Misjoinder of Parties, Abuse of Process, Dismissal of Proceedings, Construction Contract Dispute
Contract Law Company Law Civil Procedure Piercing Corporate Veil Misjoinder of Parties Abuse of Process Dismissal of Proceedings Construction Contract Dispute

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

Parties

Patrick Coen

Plaintiff

Ellen Coen

Plaintiff

Mark Doyle

Defendant

Mark Doyle Building Contractors Limited

Defendant

Ballinagam Upper Consulting Limited T/A Mark Doyle Building Contractors

Defendant

Michael Browne T/A BBA Architecture

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application to Release Defendants From Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first and third defendants were improperly joined and should be released from proceedings
  2. 2 Whether there is a credible basis for the claims against the first and third defendants
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings are bound to fail and constitute an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

There is a credible factual basis for the claims against the first and third defendants, including evidence of personal involvement and asset transfers; disputed facts require plenary hearing and discovery. The applications to release the defendants are refused as the proceedings are not bound to fail.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • First and third defendants not released from proceedings
  • First and third defendants to deliver defences within 21 days