The High Court has refused David Wright’s application to dismiss a bankruptcy summons issued by Launceston Property Finance DAC, finding that the arguments he raised did not establish an issue for trial under the Bankruptcy Act.
The summons seeks €1,742,842.27 under a High Court judgment entered on 5 October 2017. Mr Justice Kelly had awarded that sum to Launceston, as assignee of loans originally granted by Anglo Irish Bank Corporation, after a summary judgment case in which Wright disputed the debt and challenged credits relating to rent and the sale of secured properties.
Justice Costello said the 2017 judgment remained in force and had not been stayed. Although Wright had appealed it, none of his four appeal grounds concerned the amount of the judgment. The appeal was listed for hearing on 30 July 2019. The creditor had undertaken not to seek his adjudication as bankrupt until after the appeal was determined.
Wright argued that he was not indebted in an amount exceeding €20,000. He challenged two versions of the mortgage and the receiver’s appointment, but the judge said the validity of the security and appointment were outside the question before her: whether the bankruptcy summons should be dismissed. She made no finding on either issue.
He also alleged that interest on the loans had been wrongly calculated. Justice Costello said he had not raised that claim during the summary judgment case, despite being asked then whether he disputed the interest calculation. He provided no evidence that the rate charged exceeded the contractual rate and did not estimate any overcharge. The judge said litigants must bring forward their arguments and evidence at the appropriate stage, rather than litigating in a piecemeal way.
The court also rejected claims concerning rent and sale proceeds, noting that the creditor had credited €16,400 in rent and had agreed to credit the gross rather than net sale proceeds. Wright’s late allegation that inconsistent account statements suggested error or fraud concerned a difference of no more than €300. The judge said the Courts Act interest on the judgment exceeded that difference.
Justice Costello held that the unstayed judgment was enforceable and that the pending appeal did not change that position for the dismissal application. She refused the application. The bankruptcy petition is to be adjourned until after the appeal is determined, in keeping with the creditor’s undertaking. The ruling did not decide the appeal or whether Wright should ultimately be adjudicated bankrupt.