The High Court granted judgment to Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank in its claim against James Martin and Deirdre Martin for the outstanding balance on a mortgage loan, after finding that the defendants had advanced no arguable defence.
In an ex tempore judgment delivered on 24 November 2017, Mr Justice Noonan said the bank’s proofs were in order. He said the claim concerned a €95,000 loan advanced under an offer dated 25 January 2005 and secured by a mortgage over the defendants’ property. The defendants defaulted, and it appeared they had stopped making payments in August 2012, the judge said.
The bank’s solicitors issued a demand for repayment on 17 February 2014. After proceedings began, a receiver was appointed and the property was sold. The claim was then for the remaining balance after the sale proceeds had been credited. The judgment does not state the amount awarded.
Mr Justice Noonan said the first defendant had sworn several affidavits, while the second defendant had sworn none. He described the first defendant’s filings as lengthy and containing irrelevant and incoherent legal arguments, as well as serious allegations against the bank’s officers and legal representatives that he found baseless. He said the affidavits did not deny that the money had been lent and not repaid.
The judge also recounted that the defendants’ son, Seamus Martin, had tried to act for his parents as a McKenzie friend, including under a power of attorney. An order made by the President of the High Court on 2 November 2015 had ruled that he was not entitled to be heard on their behalf, the judgment states.
The matter had been adjourned on 6 February 2017 after counsel for the defendants disavowed the approach in the affidavits and sought time to put the case in proper form. The judge said another affidavit in similar terms was later delivered that day. At the hearing on 24 November 2017, the first defendant submitted a further affidavit and exhibits, which the judge said contained similar material.
The court found that the defendants did not meet the test in Aer Rianta v Ryanair for showing a fair or reasonable probability of a bona fide defence. Mr Justice Noonan also examined the loan documents and found no unfair contract term under the European Communities (Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts) Regulations 1995. He concluded that the bank was entitled to judgment for the amount claimed.