The High Court entered judgment for Allied Irish Banks plc in a dispute over a mortgage loan and overdraft, but left the amount of interest due on the overdraft for a plenary hearing.
In a judgment delivered on 26 June 2018, Mr Justice Meenan considered the bank’s motion for summary judgment against Miriam O’Donohoe and Peter O’Donohoe. The bank said €602,714.60 was due on a 2009 loan secured over an apartment in Booterstown, and claimed a further €34,283.53 on a €25,000 overdraft facility provided to Peter O’Donohoe in 2013.
Miriam O’Donohoe argued that certain mortgage terms, including provisions for variable interest, breached the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1995. The judge held that the interest terms did not breach the Regulations. He said they concerned the main subject matter of the loan and, in his view, the first defendant had chosen a variable rate despite being entitled to seek a fixed rate. The bank was not relying on the clauses concerning surcharge interest or entry to the mortgaged property, so the court did not decide whether those terms were unfair.
She also claimed that the bank had assured the couple it would propose a solution to their financial difficulties, and that ending the apartment’s tenancy for a proposed sale caused lost rental income. The judge regarded the counterclaim as essentially independent, though related to the bank’s claim. He had serious doubts about the part concerning advice to sell with vacant possession, but said there might be an issue over the alleged assurance. The court treated €29,000 as the estimated sum of the counterclaim in determining the judgment against Miriam O’Donohoe.
Peter O’Donohoe raised several issues in affidavits and submissions. The judge found no defence to the bank’s claim on most of those points, but found substance in the question of how overdraft interest had been calculated. He was satisfied that the €25,000 principal was due.
The court’s order, as stated in the judgment, was for final judgment against Miriam O’Donohoe in respect of €29,000 and judgment against Peter O’Donohoe for €25,000, with the overdraft interest amount remitted to a plenary hearing. The judge said he would hear the parties on the form of the order to be made.