Judgments: key cases in brief

The Turf Club is entitled to enforce the rules of racing against a jockey and trainer in relation to a bet. O'Connell vs Turf Club IESC 57 (Supreme Court, O'Donnell J, June 25th, 2015). The Supreme Court dismisses a High Court appeal and affirms a refusal to judicially review the power of the Turf Club to enforce the rules of racing against a jockey and trainer who had allegedly placed a large bet on a horse to lose a race, on the grounds that although the Turf Club had statutory powers and was amenable to judicial review, the applicants had agreed to be bound by the rules of racing by virtue of their licences and the Turf Club was entitled to enforce them.

– Mark Tottenham BL

There was no evidence that a bank had agreed to "park" a loan to a company director in his personal capacity. Danske Bank A/S vs Gillic IEHC 375 (High Court, McDermott J, May 21st, 2015). The High Court grants a bank summary judgment in the sum of €752,581.53 against a defendant who was granted a loan in his personal capacity while employed as a company director, finding that he could not show that he had a bona fide defence to the bank's claim in circumstances where a receiver had been validly appointed and there was no evidence that the bank had agreed to "park" the loan for five to seven years.

– Shane Kiely BL

The Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears is not applicable to claim for summary judgment for monies due on foot of a loan facility. Danske Bank A/S vs Higgins IEHC 371 (High Court, McDermott J, June 5th, 2015). The High Court grants a bank summary judgment in the sum of €253,959.68 against a couple who had sought loan facilities for the purposes of refinancing their farming business, finding that – as this was not an application for possession of a family residence but for summary judgment for monies due on foot of a loan facility – the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears did not apply and an alleged breach of the code could not therefore be relied upon as a defence to the bank's claim.

– Shane Kiely

The findings of the Financial Services Ombudsman's are upheld on interest rate increases for variable-rate mortgage holders. Financial Services Ombudsman vs Millar IECA 127, (Court of Appeal, Kelly J, June 24th, 2015). The Court of Appeal allows an appeal from the High Court, sets aside a decision overturning a finding of Financial Services Ombudsman and restores the original finding that a couple who had been subjected to an increase in the variable interest rate of their mortgage are not entitled to relief, on the grounds that they had not demonstrated that the decision of the ombudsman was vitiated by a serious and significant error or series of errors, and the construction of the contractual term regarding "market conditions" given by the Ombudsman was correct.

– Ciarán Joyce BL

The final 18 months of a sentence are suspended for a drugs offender with severe medical difficulties. DPP vs farmer IECA 129 (Court of Appeal, Mahon J, June 11th, 2015). The Court of Appeal allows an appeal of the severity of concurrent seven-year terms of imprisonment imposed for possession of drugs on a man with serious medical difficulties and suspends the final 18 months of the sentence, finding that insufficient weight was afforded by the sentencing judge to the appellant's medical problems and the added difficulty they would cause him while in custody.

– Ciarán Joyce

A bank is entitled to summary judgment against guarantors of a company now in receivership. Ulster Bank Irl Ltd v Quinn, IEHC 376 (High Court, McDermott J, May 21st, 2015). The High Court grants an order for summary judgment in the sum of €97.5 million to a plaintiff bank, claimed on foot of guarantees provided by the defendants as security for an overdraft facility furnished to a company now in receivership, as the defendants had failed to establish a fair or reasonable possibility of a real or bona fide defence to the bank's claim.

– Ian Fitzharris BL

Fines are substantially reduced for corporate offenders who produced noxious odours at waste-disposal facility. DPP vs Cavan County Council, IECA 130 (Court of Appeal, Edwards J, June 24th, 2015). The Court of Appeal allows an appeal of fines imposed on corporate offenders who pleaded guilty to offences relating to the disposal of waste other than in accordance with a term of the waste licence that had been granted by the Environmental Protection Agency, finding that the fines were excessive and disproportionate to a significant degree in light of all the mitigation.

– Ciarán Joyce

An injunction against an internet service provider is to last as long as necessary to protect copyright. Sony Music Entertainment (Ireland) Ltd vs UPC Communications Ireland Ltd (No 2), IEHC 386 (High Court, Cregan J, May 21st, 2015). The High Court, in judgment supplemental to orders against an internet service provider (ISP) to take steps to prevent its customers engaging in copyright infringement a), refuses to appoint an independent adjudicator to determine whether customers should have their service suspended or terminated, b), orders that business users be excluded from the terms of the ISP's scheme and c), determines that the orders against the ISP be reviewed after five years, on the grounds that they should last as long as they were required to protect the plaintiffs' copyright.

– Mark Tottenham

The full text of the above judgments is available on courts.ie. These reports were written and compiled by Stare Decisis Hibernia: StareDecisisHibernia.com