The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by Rory O’Brien, Danny O’Brien and Michael McDermott against summary judgment in favour of Ulster Bank Ireland Ltd.
The ruling concerned the evidence needed when a creditor seeks summary judgment, a procedure that allows a court to decide a debt claim without a full trial where no real defence has been shown.
Mr Justice John MacMenamin said the initial burden remained on the bank to establish a prima facie case that the debt was due. Once that threshold was met, however, a defendant could not resist judgment simply by issuing a bald denial. The defence had to explain clearly why the money claimed was not actually due.
In this case, the court found there was no factual conflict. The defendants had filed no affidavit responding to the bank's evidence.
Ulster Bank official Mary Murray had sworn an affidavit stating that she was one of the signatories of a letter of demand dated 1 February 2013. The letter required immediate repayment of amounts due under facility letters. She could give direct evidence that the demand was written and sent and that no response was received.
The defendants had argued that the bank's proof was hearsay. Mr Justice MacMenamin rejected that contention. Because Murray had personally signed the demand, her evidence about it was first-hand rather than hearsay.
The judge said that where a plaintiff establishes a prima facie case and the defendant produces no meaningful evidence to rebut it, summary judgment may be granted. A case must instead proceed to a full hearing where there is a genuine factual or legal dispute or an arguable defence.
Mr Justice MacMenamin agreed with the other judgments delivered in the case and dismissed the appeal. The ruling therefore left the bank's summary judgment in place.