Carlin & Anor v A&L Goodbody Northern Ireland LLP & Ors (Rev2) [2024] NICA 32 (24 April 2024)

Carlin & Anor v A&L Goodbody Northern Ireland LLP & Ors (Rev2) [2024] NICA 32 (24 April 2024)

There was no evidence or credible basis for any of the appellants' allegations; the orders at first instance were adequately reasoned and correct; the appeal was wholly without merit.

Citation
[2024] NICA 32
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Thomas Anthony Carlin; Appellant/defendant: Maxine Karon Hughes; Respondent/plaintiff: A&L Goodbody Northern Ireland LLP; Respondent/plaintiff: Tanya Surgeon; Respondent/plaintiff: Keith Gibson; Respondent/plaintiff: Santander UK PLC
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
24 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Mortgage Possession, Strike Out Applications, Costs Orders, Recusal Applications

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Anthony Carlin

Appellant/defendant

Maxine Karon Hughes

Appellant/defendant

A&L Goodbody Northern Ireland LLP

Respondent/plaintiff

Tanya Surgeon

Respondent/plaintiff

Keith Gibson

Respondent/plaintiff

Santander UK PLC

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the orders made by Deputy Judge Simpson should be overturned
  2. 2 Whether there was evidence of unprofessional conduct, fraud, criminal conduct, discrimination, abuse of process, or bias
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' applications and grounds had merit

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidence or credible basis for any of the appellants' allegations; the orders at first instance were adequately reasoned and correct; the appeal was wholly without merit.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment and orders at first instance affirmed
  • Costs order against appellants