The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland v McFeely (Conal Derek) and McFeely (Gerard Noel) [2016] NICA 34 (01 August 2016)

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland v McFeely (Conal Derek) and McFeely (Gerard Noel) [2016] NICA 34 (01 August 2016)

The application to extend time was refused because the applicants failed to actively defend the original judgment, delayed unreasonably, and relied on unreliable hearsay. The respondent retained standing to enforce the guarantee as the loan was not transferred to Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc, and the NAMA Act did not preclude enforcement by the respondent.

Citation
[2016] NICA 34
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland; Defendant/appellant: Conal Derek McFeely; Defendant/appellant: Gerard Noel McFeely
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
01 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend Time for Service of Notice of Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application to Extend Time
Outcome
Application to extend time refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Appeal, Guarantee Enforcement, Assignment of Loan Agreements, Standing to Enforce Guarantees, NAMA Act Interpretation
Civil Procedure Banking Law Contract Law Extension of Time for Appeal Guarantee Enforcement Assignment of Loan Agreements Standing to Enforce Guarantees NAMA Act Interpretation

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

Parties

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland

Plaintiff/respondent

Conal Derek McFeely

Defendant/appellant

Gerard Noel McFeely

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Application to Extend Time for Service of Notice of Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application to Extend Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time for service of notice of appeal should be extended
  2. 2 Whether the respondent had standing to enforce the guarantee after alleged transfer of loan
  3. 3 Effect of NAMA Act 2009 on assignment and holding of loan assets

Ratio Decidendi

The application to extend time was refused because the applicants failed to actively defend the original judgment, delayed unreasonably, and relied on unreliable hearsay. The respondent retained standing to enforce the guarantee as the loan was not transferred to Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc, and the NAMA Act did not preclude enforcement by the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application to extend time refused

Orders

  • Application to extend time for service of notice of appeal is refused