The Court of Appeal has ruled that Dominic Carney cannot pursue litigation over personal property he says was left at premises on Washington Street, Cork, because the proceedings vested in the Official Assignee when he was adjudicated bankrupt and did not revert to him after his discharge.
In a judgment delivered on 3 October 2024, Ms Justice Butler determined a preliminary issue raised by the Official Assignee in response to two motions Carney brought in the Court of Appeal. The motions sought clarification of an earlier order and permission to enlarge his claim. The court held that Carney lacked standing to bring either motion or continue the proceedings.
Carney’s High Court proceedings began in 2014 against Bank of Scotland and receiver Gearóid Costelloe. The wider claims, which challenged the mortgage, the receiver’s appointment and other matters, had largely been dismissed by the Court of Appeal in 2017. That decision permitted Carney to pursue only a claim for the return of personal items listed in an affidavit. It expressly excluded a claim for damages over alleged wrongdoing by the receiver.
Carney later sought to add a damages claim, but the High Court refused permission in 2018. He missed the deadline to appeal that refusal and instead brought the two motions in the Court of Appeal.
The Official Assignee argued that the litigation became part of Carney’s bankruptcy estate when he was adjudicated bankrupt on 13 March 2019. Carney argued that the Official Assignee had disclaimed the proceedings, or that they reverted to him after three years. The court rejected both arguments. It held that the proceedings were property belonging to Carney when he was adjudicated bankrupt and therefore vested automatically in the Official Assignee. The statutory three-year re-vesting provision applied only to a bankrupt’s family home, and the court had not been told that the property at issue was Carney’s family home.
The judgment noted that the Official Assignee considered there would be no or limited commercial benefit to creditors in pursuing the litigation. The court said the Official Assignee could decide not to pursue it, and that a failure to continue proceedings did not amount to a formal disclaimer.
The court refused Carney’s two motions and struck out the entire proceedings. It said that, even if Carney had retained standing, the motions would have been refused: the 2017 judgment had limited his claim to return of the listed property, and he could not use the motions to add a damages claim after failing to appeal that decision. The judge stated a provisional view that Carney should bear the costs of the Official Assignee and receiver before the Court of Appeal; the judgment does not record a final costs order.