The High Court has allowed Everyday Finance Designated Activity Company to replace Allied Irish Banks plc as plaintiff in proceedings over a guarantee linked to a quarry company’s loan. It also refused the first defendant’s application to dismiss or strike out the claim against him.
Mr Justice Conleth Bradley ruled on the two applications in a judgment delivered on 19 December 2023. The court later clarified part of the judgment on 13 February 2024 and ordered the costs of both applications to be costs in the cause.
AIB issued a summary summons in November 2016 and sought liberty to enter final judgment against the first defendant for €1,603,210.61. The underlying facility of €2,103,730 was advanced to Redrock Quarry Company Limited. The judgment says the first and second defendants signed written guarantees on or about 30 November 2007, each subject to the documents exhibited in the proceedings.
The first defendant disputed whether the evidence established that Everyday had acquired the relevant loan and guarantee. He pointed to differences between dates and descriptions in the redacted 2022 transfer deed and the loan and guarantee documents relied on in the case. The judge said those disputes did not have to be resolved at this stage. He found the affidavits and exhibited documents provided prima facie evidence capable of supporting Everyday’s claim to legal title, and ordered its substitution under the court rules.
That ruling did not determine whether Everyday will ultimately prove its claim. The judge said the first defendant could raise objections to the documents and transfer at the substantive hearing.
The first defendant also sought dismissal or strike-out on grounds of delay, arguing that delay had caused prejudice. The judge found that delay up to March 2020 was not shown to be inordinate. He also found the period from October 2022 to October or November 2023 was not inordinate and that the first defendant had not shown that it caused prejudice. The court refused the strike-out application.
The judgment records the first defendant’s concerns about the release of the second defendant from guarantee obligations, Redrock’s dissolution, possible fading memories or unavailable witnesses, and access to records or evidence from AIB. These were submissions in the strike-out application; the court did not decide the underlying guarantee liability or the eventual summary judgment claim. The final orders’ precise terms and any further or ancillary matters were left for discussion with the parties.