The High Court allowed ACC Bank’s appeal against a decision by the Master of the High Court to strike out its contested loan proceedings against Thomas Heffernan and Mary Heffernan. The court held that the Master had no jurisdiction to strike out the case because it should have been started by plenary summons.
Mr Justice Hogan’s judgment, delivered on 4 November 2013, concerned proceedings begun by summary summons on 18 May 2011. ACC Bank claimed it advanced €3.36 million to the defendants in September 2007 and that €4,152,755, including interest, was due when it demanded repayment in February 2011. The bank later sought liberty to enter final judgment for €4,244,749, including further interest. Those figures and the underlying debt are the bank’s claims, not findings on the appeal.
The defendants entered appearances and filed affidavits disputing the claim. Before the Master, the bank argued that the contested matter should be transferred to the High Court under Order 37, rule 6. The defendants sought to have the proceedings struck out, arguing that the bank knew they had a substantive defence when it chose the summary procedure. The Master struck out the proceedings in October 2012, leaving the bank free to start again by plenary summons.
On appeal, Mr Justice Hogan said a case becomes contested when defendants oppose an application for summary judgment by filing affidavits disputing the claim. In such a case, the Master cannot decide the factual dispute, assess the likely strength of either side’s case or determine that the action should have begun by plenary summons. The Master’s role is to transfer the matter to the High Court when it is administratively ready for hearing, unless the parties consent to a plenary hearing with appropriate directions.
The appeal ruling addressed only the Master’s authority and the next procedural step. The case may now proceed to consideration of the separate question of whether ACC Bank is entitled to summary judgment. The High Court did not decide that question or determine the defendants’ liability.