The High Court has ruled on outstanding discovery requests in a case brought by Sean O’Driscoll against Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited (in special liquidation) and IBRC Assurance Company Limited. Mr Justice Brian J. McGovern delivered the judgment on 7 February 2014.
Both sides had sought discovery, and the court said they had reached agreement on some matters. The remaining requests concerned, among other things, documents about four funds in which O’Driscoll invested: Woolgate, European, UK Banks and Taurus.
On O’Driscoll’s application, the judge allowed discovery of earlier drafts of brochures and contractual documents under categories 4, 14, 31 and 39. He said those drafts were relevant because evidence of material changes could undermine the defendants’ case and support O’Driscoll’s, including on whether the defendants acted in good faith and breached a fiduciary duty.
The judge refused several other requests. He found that categories 2, 12, 29 and 37 concerned matters not in dispute; categories 5, 15, 32 and 40 were disproportionate where the contents of the contractual documents were not disputed; and categories 7 and 17 were not sufficiently connected to the pleadings. He also refused category 8 as unnecessary, while directing the defendants’ modified offer of discovery, and refused category 18 while allowing discovery as offered by the defendants.
Requests under categories 22 and 27 were refused. Category 22 would involve searching many thousands of documents and correspondence involving the defendants and 11 joint venture partners about 14 standalone properties across three portfolio investments. The judge described it as a fishing expedition and said it would be oppressive, unnecessary and disproportionate. He refused category 27 on the same basis, also citing documents already disclosed or made available. For category 42, concerning the Taurus Fund, he refused O’Driscoll’s request but directed discovery offered by the defendants.
On the defendants’ application, the judge allowed category 3(d), requiring O’Driscoll’s discovery to cover the relationship between him and the defendants, including other investment opportunities they offered. He said this was relevant to the dispute and to the defendants’ contributory-negligence argument. He refused category 4 because O’Driscoll’s appetite for high-risk investment was not in dispute.
The judge also allowed categories 7, 10, 13 and 16, which concerned the four funds, but limited discovery to the transaction dates: 28 September 2006 for Woolgate; 15 December 2006 for the European Geared Property Fund; 26 April 2007 for the AIAC UK Banks Fund; and 10 August 2007 for the Anglo Taurus Retail Geared Property Fund. The judgment addresses discovery only; it does not determine the underlying claims.