The High Court withdrew Cornelious M. Cagney’s defamation claim against the Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland from the jury, ruling that the bank’s communications to the Irish Credit Bureau were made on an occasion of qualified privilege.
In a decision delivered on 7 May 2015, Mr Justice Hedigan said the undisputed facts left no case in law for the jury to decide. He said a judge should generally avoid interfering with a jury’s role, but must withdraw a case when no legally viable case exists on the undisputed facts.
Cagney alleged that the bank caused two entries to be recorded against his name in the Irish Credit Bureau: category “K”, indicating that his credit card had been revoked, and category “L”, indicating that he had settled an account for less than the amount due. The bank denied defamation and relied on qualified privilege, saying it had a duty or interest in communicating the information to the Bureau, which had a corresponding interest in receiving it.
The judgment describes the Bureau as a credit reference body owned and financed by financial institutions and local authorities. Its members supply information on credit agreements, which other members can use to assess lending risk. The bank was a member.
The judge held that the communications about the card revocation in 2010 and the short settlement in 2012 were protected by qualified privilege. He noted that such privilege can be defeated by proof of malice, but Cagney had not pleaded malice or sought to establish it during the hearing. The judge also referred to evidence from bank employee John Ruddy, who made the decision to communicate with the Bureau and did not know Cagney; the judgment said he acted in the normal way on the information given to him.
The ruling concerned only whether the bank defamed Cagney through the Bureau communications. The judge acknowledged that Cagney had other complaints about his treatment by the bank, but those were outside the issue before him. The claim was withdrawn from the jury and failed; the decision does not state that the court determined every dispute between the parties.