The High Court set aside a Master’s order refusing the Bank of Ireland liberty to enter final judgment against Paul Keehan, and held the bank was entitled to judgment on its claim for €317,043.38 plus interest pursuant to contract or statute.
Mr Justice Ryan delivered the judgment on 16 September 2013, on the bank’s motion under Order 63, rule 9. The Master had refused the bank’s application for judgment, dismissed its claim and awarded costs to Mr Keehan.
The bank claimed money due on two accounts. Its evidence described a €275,000 credit agreement from 2005, later replaced by a February 2011 agreement for €299,724.32 plus accrued interest, and a current account overdrawn by €1,633.33. The bank relied on affidavits from its business banking manager, who said he had reviewed the bank’s books and records, along with loan and account statements, signed loan documents and demand letters.
Mr Keehan did not file a replying affidavit. His counsel argued that the bank had failed to prove its case because its evidence did not comply with the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act 1879, as amended, and also raised technical criticisms of the bank’s evidence. The Master accepted the principal argument.
Justice Ryan said the Act’s provisions on proving copies of bankers’ records did not prevent a bank employee from giving evidence based on the bank’s books and records. Citing earlier High Court decisions, he said such evidence could establish a prima facie case, subject to the weight it should receive if the records were challenged. He noted that no factual defence had been advanced to contest the bank’s account of the debt.
The judge found that the affidavits and exhibits showed signed loan acceptances, an expired loan term, outstanding balances on both accounts and demands for payment. He rejected the technical criticisms as insufficient to justify dismissing the proceedings and said the information given was enough for the defendant to know whether to pay the debt.
The court concluded that the bank had made out a prima facie case and was entitled to judgment. The judgment does not state the amount of interest ultimately payable or set out a separate costs order in the final disposition.