The Supreme Court dismissed Cornelius M. Cagney’s appeal against a High Court order made during his application for an interlocutory injunction against the Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Laffoy on 22 October 2015, concerned an appeal filed on 12 February 2013 against an order dated 25 January 2013. The Supreme Court said it could consider only that order. Any challenge to the High Court’s later final decision on the injunction application would have required a separate appeal, which was not before it.
The dispute arose from a joint account held by Mr Cagney and his adult daughters, Helene and Genevieve. The account had a €15,000 overdraft facility. In a letter dated 29 August 2012, the Bank said it would terminate the facility and asked the account holders to clear the balance and close the account within 21 days.
Mr Cagney sought an interlocutory injunction to prevent the Bank acting on that letter while his proceedings continued. The High Court’s 25 January 2013 order continued the Bank’s undertaking concerning the account and overdraft until 15 February, and directed Mr Cagney to respond to a proposed settlement letter and file an affidavit. The motion was later adjourned, with the undertaking continuing until the injunction application was finally resolved on 17 June 2013.
The Bank argued that the appeal had become moot. It told the Supreme Court that the High Court had made its final order on the injunction application in June 2013 and that the temporary order appealed against had expired. The Bank also relied on instructions dated 5 June 2014 to discharge the account balance and close the account. Mr Cagney confirmed that the balance had been paid, though he said he had later received a statement. The Supreme Court concluded, on the information before it, that the account was closed.
The Court said it could not restrain the Bank from acting in relation to an account that no longer existed, so the injunction application and appeal were moot. It also held that the appeal against the January order was moot after that order’s effect ended on 15 February 2013. The Court did not review the June 2013 final order on the injunction application. It dismissed the appeal.