The High Court has directed that Ulster Bank Ireland Limited’s claim over a €912,000 term loan be dealt with at a plenary hearing, finding disputes about the loan terms and demand that were not suitable for resolution on a summary judgment application.
In a judgment delivered on 16 May 2014, Ms Justice Barton refused the bank’s application for liberty to enter summary judgment on sums due under the 4 April 2006 facility. The bank claimed a total of €1,130,652.99 across two term loans and a current account.
The defendants accepted that they drew down the 2006 loan, but said their agreement was that it would be repaid within a year of the sale of serviced sites or under a repayment schedule to be agreed. They said the sites remained unsold and no repayment schedule had been agreed. They also disputed whether the bank had made a valid demand under the facility’s written demand provisions.
The bank disputed that interpretation. It argued that the loan was due because the borrowers had not paid interest and that the loan term had expired. The defendants also questioned whether the default schedule relied on by the bank applied to the 2006 facility. The judgment records that an earlier version of the facility documents had been challenged as a draft; the bank later produced copies of the originals showing amendments and initials. It also accepted that the defendants’ family home and two acres were excluded from the security for that loan.
Justice Barton said the meaning of certain terms, compliance with the demand provisions and the applicability of the default schedule raised issues that should not be resolved on a summary judgment motion. If decided in the defendants’ favour, those issues could provide a defence, so that part of the claim should proceed by plenary hearing.
The court reached a different conclusion on the current account and the term loan under the 27 April 2004 facility. It was not satisfied that the defendants had met the low threshold of an arguable defence to those parts of the claim. The judgment does not record a final judgment amount or set out the formal orders; the judge said she would discuss the form of the orders with counsel.