The Supreme Court has struck out a renewed claim by farmer James J. Behan against Bank of Ireland, ruling that the dispute over his treatment under a farm rescue interest subsidy scheme had already been decided in earlier proceedings.
The bank appealed after the High Court refused to strike out Behan’s second action. Behan argued that the bank had concealed its use of money connected with the Reduced Interest Subsidy Scheme for Farmers in Severe Financial Distress and said he was now pleading fraud.
However, Ms Justice Denham said the substance of the second claim was essentially the same as the case already heard over 18 days in the High Court and later appealed to the Supreme Court.
That earlier litigation examined Behan’s participation in the scheme, including credits entered by the bank after a settlement of his indebtedness. The High Court had awarded him £20,892.18 in relation to the scheme. The Supreme Court later left that award intact while allowing a bank cross-appeal on a separate limitation issue.
In the new proceedings, Behan sought damages including alleged losses relating to lands at Dollardstown and Grangerosnolvin, loss of profits, his mill and machinery, farm buildings and his home. The claimed special damages totalled IR£3,780,500.
Denham J. held that the scheme itself and the alleged consequences of the bank’s conduct had already been before the courts. The fact that Behan now wished to produce further evidence or characterise the conduct as fraud did not permit the dispute to be litigated again.
The court applied the principle of res judicata, which prevents substantially the same cause of action from being reopened after it has been finally decided between the parties.
Denham J. acknowledged Behan’s continuing sense of grievance but said litigation had to come to an end. The Supreme Court allowed the bank’s appeal and ordered that Behan’s proceedings be struck out.