Charles Kelly Ltd. v Ulster Bank Ireland Ltd. [2020] IECA 8 (29 January 2020)

The defendant failed to establish a prima facie defence in its pleadings and evidence to the claim that it wrongfully honoured payments; therefore, security for costs should not have been ordered.

Citation: [2020] IECA 8
Parties: Plaintiff/appellant: Charles Kelly Limited; Defendant/respondent: Ulster Bank Ireland Limited
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Judgment Date: 29 January 2020
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order for Security for Costs
Outcome: appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Security for Costs, Prima Facie Defence, Mandate Operation, Misappropriation of Funds, Statute of Limitations

Civil Procedure Company Law Banking Law Security for Costs Prima Facie Defence Mandate Operation Misappropriation of Funds Statute of Limitations

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6

Parties

Charles Kelly Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Ulster Bank Ireland Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendant established a prima facie defence to the plaintiff's claim for wrongful honouring of payments
2 Whether security for costs should be ordered under section 52 of the Companies Act 2014

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant failed to establish a prima facie defence in its pleadings and evidence to the claim that it wrongfully honoured payments; therefore, security for costs should not have been ordered.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

Order for security for costs set aside
Stay on proceedings lifted