The Supreme Court has dismissed Jerry Beades’s appeal against a High Court summary judgment ordering him to pay Bank of Scotland plc €9,684,987.04, plus costs. The court upheld the 2012 decision; it did not make a new money award in this appeal.
In a judgment delivered on 29 July 2019, O’Donnell J. said the bank’s claim arose from four loan facility letters issued between May 2005 and February 2008 by Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Ltd. That lender merged into Bank of Scotland plc in 2010, transferring its assets and liabilities to the plaintiff bank.
The High Court entered summary judgment in July 2012 after finding that Beades had not shown a triable defence. On appeal, he raised complaints about the handling of the High Court proceedings, the bank’s evidence, service of a demand letter and the swearing of an affidavit for the bank.
The Supreme Court said Beades had not denied receiving the loan funds and had not provided new evidence to support a defence or counterclaim. It held that Caoimhe Tracey, a Certus employee who had personal knowledge of the dealings and had reviewed the bank’s records, could give evidence under the summary judgment procedure. The court also rejected Beades’s argument that the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act 1879 prevented her evidence from supporting the claim: he had not identified a particular bank-book entry for which the Act’s proof requirements had not been met.
Beades disputed delivery of a demand letter to 30 Richmond Avenue, Fairview, arguing on appeal that the address did not exist and had been changed without his authority. The judgment noted that a 2011 bank letter recorded that he had authorised correspondence to be sent there. It also said Beades had not established why proof of demand-letter delivery was necessary for the term loans at issue.
The court found no basis to set aside the High Court judgment, and dismissed the appeal. The underlying summary judgment therefore remains in place.