The High Court has declared that a debt owed by Gerard Hannon to Ulster Bank Ireland Limited is well charged on his interest in five agricultural land folios in County Sligo, after finding that their land certificates had been deposited with the bank as security for borrowing.
The declaration followed a full plenary hearing in which the bank sought a well charging order. Hannon contested the bank’s entitlement, saying the certificates had been lodged for safekeeping and that he had not agreed to an equitable deposit.
Mr Justice Michael White preferred the evidence of John Lane, a former commercial manager at the bank’s Ballymote branch, over Hannon’s account of a meeting on 7 June 2006. The judge was satisfied that Lane read a memorandum to Hannon and signed it in his presence. The bank already held certificates for folios 2289, 2288, 2286, 2285 and 10734, the court found.
The judge also considered facility letters and correspondence about the loans. A 2004 letter referred to equitable deposits of certificates for some of the lands, while later letters described mortgages or equitable deposits as security. The court found that the certificates were not held for safekeeping and that Hannon understood they secured substantial borrowing.
The ruling addressed the effect of the Registration of Deeds and Title Act 2006 and the requirements for registering a lien. The court rejected the argument that the bank had to prove Hannon actually received the registered notice. It found that service by registered post to the address for service recorded for the owner was sufficient under the applicable practice direction, and that Hannon had been treated equitably.
The court noted that the status of separate proceedings, Record Number 2012/58P, brought by Hannon against the Property Registration Authority and the bank to challenge the lien registration was unclear. It said further submissions from the parties to that litigation might be required on that issue.
Subject to that unresolved matter, the court declared that the sum specified in the Second Schedule to the bank’s Special Summons, with interest, stood well charged on Hannon’s interest in the five folios. The judgment does not state the amount of that sum in the supplied text.