The High Court held that the substantial issues raised by Michael Quinn and Brigid Quinn against Allied Irish Banks plc had already been decided, and struck out those proceedings. Mr Justice White also dismissed any remaining matters against the bank that should have been raised in the earlier case and ordered that the plaintiffs may not bring further proceedings against the bank without the court’s leave.
The decision, delivered on 21 December 2016, concerned motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ 2013 action and their application to amend their statement of claim. The plaintiffs alleged, among other things, breach of contract, negligence and breach of duty by the bank and McDonough Breen Solicitors and John McDonough. They also claimed ownership of two plots of land, identified as B and C in a map attached to the judgment.
The bank and the solicitors argued that an earlier High Court judgment had already determined the relevant issues. In that 2012 case, the court held that an equitable mortgage and constructive trust applied to the lands, and made declarations concerning the bank’s security. The Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiffs’ appeal in 2015; the Supreme Court later refused leave to appeal.
Mr Justice White found that the claims against the bank concerning plots B and C were the same in substance as matters determined in the earlier proceedings. He held those matters to be res judicata. Any claims against the bank that were not already barred could not proceed because they should have been brought in the earlier case, under the rule in Henderson v Henderson.
The court treated the solicitors’ claims differently. It held that allegations that the plaintiffs had not instructed the solicitors to give an undertaking or prepare a certificate of title had already been determined: the earlier High Court had found that the plaintiffs gave unequivocal instructions. The plaintiffs could not pursue fraud allegations against the solicitors.
However, the judge said a potential negligence issue remained: the plaintiffs alleged that the solicitors failed to arrange transfer of plots B and C to the company before finalising the certificate of title, and so left those plots out of the mortgage document. The court said it was unclear whether that alleged failure caused the plaintiffs any loss. It invited the plaintiffs and the solicitors to make submissions on which parts of the pleadings should be struck out to reflect the earlier judgment. The court did not finally determine that remaining negligence issue in this decision. It also held that the Henderson rule did not apply to the solicitors because they were not parties to the earlier proceedings.