W.L. Construction Ltd -v- Chawke & anor [2016] IEHC 539 (03 October 2016)

W.L. Construction Ltd -v- Chawke & anor [2016] IEHC 539 (03 October 2016)

The plaintiff’s case is wholly dependent on the evidence of Mr. Loughnane and Mr. O’Kane, both of whom were found to be dishonest and unreliable. The plaintiff’s claim is tainted by fraud, including falsification of invoices and repeated lies under oath. The court is not satisfied that any sum is due to the plaintiff, nor that a prima facie case has been established. The claim is dismissed for failure to establish a case to answer and for abuse of process due to litigation misconduct.

Citation
[2016] IEHC 539
Parties
Plaintiff: W. L. Construction Limited; Defendant: Charles Chawke; Defendant: Edward Joseph Bohan
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
03 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Contract/construction Dispute / Application for Non Suit/dismissal at Close of Plaintiff’s Case
Outcome
Plaintiff’s claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Building Contracts, Fraudulent Evidence, Litigation Misconduct, Abuse of Process, Non Suit, Prima Facie Case, Discovery, Expert Evidence
Contract Law Civil Procedure Building Contracts Fraudulent Evidence Litigation Misconduct Abuse of Process Non Suit Prima Facie Case +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W. L. Construction Limited

Plaintiff

Charles Chawke

Defendant

Edward Joseph Bohan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Contract/construction Dispute / Application for Non Suit/dismissal at Close of Plaintiff’s Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed for litigation misconduct and abuse of process due to fraudulent invoices and dishonest evidence
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case against the defendants at the close of its evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff’s case is wholly dependent on the evidence of Mr. Loughnane and Mr. O’Kane, both of whom were found to be dishonest and unreliable. The plaintiff’s claim is tainted by fraud, including falsification of invoices and repeated lies under oath. The court is not satisfied that any sum is due to the plaintiff, nor that a prima facie case has been established. The claim is dismissed for failure to establish a case to answer and for abuse of process due to litigation misconduct.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff’s claim dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed in its entirety at the close of the plaintiff’s case
  • Costs to be determined