The High Court dismissed former Anglo-Irish Bank shareholder Denis Riordan’s judicial review challenge to a €5,000 fee required for an appeal against an Assessor’s determination. Mr Justice Heslin ruled on 3 August 2022 that the Tribunal’s rules applied to the appeal and that the Irish Financial Services Appeals Tribunal had given adequate reasons for striking it out after the fee was not paid.
The case concerned an appeal Mr Riordan lodged in May 2020 against the Assessor’s determination that Anglo’s shares had no value when the bank was taken into State ownership, meaning no compensation was payable. He argued that the appeal arose under the Anglo-Irish Bank Corporation Act 2009, which did not itself specify a fee, and that the Tribunal lacked power to demand one under rules made for appeals under the Central Bank Act.
Mr Riordan initially applied for a fee waiver, saying he was a 73-year-old retiree who would suffer injustice if unable to pay. The application form left the sections for supporting reasons and documents blank. The Tribunal’s registrar repeatedly sought further information about his financial circumstances. Mr Riordan later withdrew the waiver application, maintaining that no fee was legally due.
The Tribunal explained in correspondence that the 2009 Act applied provisions of the Central Bank Act to these appeals, including a requirement to pay any fee prescribed by Tribunal rules. It struck out the appeal on 24 June 2020 under Rule 5(2) of the 2008 rules after Mr Riordan withdrew his waiver application and did not pay.
The High Court held that the Assessor’s determination was an “appealable decision” for the purposes of the Central Bank Act framework. It found that the 2009 Act applied the relevant appeal procedures, while the Tribunal and its rules derived from the Central Bank Act. Those rules required the €5,000 fee but allowed all or part of it to be waived where payment would cause serious financial hardship or injustice.
The judge also rejected the argument that the Tribunal had failed to give adequate reasons. He said its June 2020 letter explained the statutory basis for the fee and the possibility of a waiver. The court noted that Mr Riordan had chosen to withdraw his waiver request rather than provide the requested financial information.
The court dismissed the judicial review claim. It did not determine final costs in the judgment: the judge expressed a preliminary view that costs should follow the event and invited the parties to agree the final order. If they could not agree, short written submissions were due by 19 September 2022.