The High Court has entered judgment for Allied Irish Banks plc for €216,000 against Victoria Casey in a dispute over a guarantee for credit facilities made available to her husband. Mr Justice Barr refused the bank’s claim for interest before judgment, but said interest would accrue on the judgment in the usual way from 15 March 2016 until payment.
The bank sought summary judgment, saying Ms Casey had guaranteed her husband William Casey’s present and future indebtedness under a guarantee dated 3 June 2010. It said he later entered a credit agreement with the bank, defaulted on repayments and failed to meet a demand for payment. Ms Casey denied signing the guarantee or the credit agreement and asked for the claim to proceed to a plenary hearing.
Her handwriting expert examined the original documents. He concluded that the signature on the guarantee was genuine, but that the signature attributed to Ms Casey on the 15 March 2011 credit agreement was not hers. The judge said the expert’s opinion contradicted her claim that she had not signed the guarantee. With no external evidence supporting that denial, he found it was not an arguable defence.
The judge also rejected Ms Casey’s other grounds. He said her allegations of misrepresentation lacked details, and found no arguable basis for a duty on the bank to ensure she obtained independent legal advice in the absence of an allegation of undue influence or other impropriety known, or that ought to have been known, to the bank. He held that the bank’s further lending to her husband in 2011 provided consideration for the guarantee. The disputed signature on the credit agreement did not affect her liability under the guarantee, he said, because her signature was not necessary for that loan contract.
Mr Justice Barr said a request to cross-examine the bank’s affidavit witness did not by itself prevent summary judgment; the defendant had to establish an arguable defence for which cross-examination was needed. He acknowledged that Ms Casey appeared to have had her signature forged on a significant number of documents disclosed in family law proceedings, but concluded she had not raised an arguable defence to this claim.
The bank had also sought interest from the date of its demand under the guarantee. The judge declined to award that interest because the bank had not specified the amount claimed, the applicable rates or the daily accrual. He granted judgment for €216,000, with interest on the judgment accruing in the usual way from the date of judgment until payment.