McAteer v Devine & Ors [2017] NICA 79 (07 December 2017)

McAteer v Devine & Ors [2017] NICA 79 (07 December 2017)

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge made no material error of law or fact, and the appellant failed to establish any conspiracy, breach of contract, or actionable misconduct by the respondent. The trial judge’s findings were supported by the evidence, and the appellate court found no basis to interfere. Interlocutory appeals were out of time and not permitted.

Citation
[2017] NICA 79
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Daniel McAteer; Defendant: Sean Devine; Defendant: Mary Devine; Defendant/respondent: Brendan Fox, Partner, Cleaver Fulton Rankin, Solicitors; Defendant: John Love, Partner, Moore Stephens Bradley McDaid; Defendant: Stephen McCarron
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
07 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen’s Bench Division, Commercial List) to Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Conspiracy to Injure, Solicitor’s Duty of Care, Confidentiality, Appellate Restraint, Professional Conduct
Civil Procedure Contract Law Tort Law Professional Negligence Breach of Contract Conspiracy to Injure Solicitor’s Duty of Care Confidentiality +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 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel McAteer

Plaintiff/appellant

Sean Devine

Defendant

Mary Devine

Defendant

Brendan Fox, Partner, Cleaver Fulton Rankin, Solicitors

Defendant/respondent

John Love, Partner, Moore Stephens Bradley McDaid

Defendant

Stephen McCarron

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen’s Bench Division, Commercial List) to Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent (Brendan Fox) was liable for breach of contract as a solicitor to the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was party to a conspiracy to injure the appellant’s business and personal interests
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in law or fact in dismissing the claims

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge made no material error of law or fact, and the appellant failed to establish any conspiracy, breach of contract, or actionable misconduct by the respondent. The trial judge’s findings were supported by the evidence, and the appellate court found no basis to interfere. Interlocutory appeals were out of time and not permitted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the respondent (Brendan Fox) against the appellant (Daniel McAteer)
  • No leave to appeal interlocutory orders or to extend time for such appeals