The High Court has adjourned Cabot Financial (Ireland) Ltd’s application for summary judgment in a debt claim, directing that the case proceed to a plenary hearing so the parties can put relevant evidence before the court.
In a judgment delivered on 10 April 2025, Mr Justice Barry O’Donnell said the evidence in its current state did not establish Cabot Financial’s entitlement to summary judgment. The court did not determine whether the debt was owed or find that the defendant had made out a defence.
The proceedings began in 2018 over a loan agreement made in 2008. The original loan offer was for €280,000. Cabot sought judgment for €222,561.32, saying that sum remained due after a €717.19 credit was applied. The court noted that the plaintiff’s evidence did not explain the credit.
Cabot relied on documents tracing assignments from Ulster Bank to Promontoria, then to Cabot Asset Purchases (Ireland) Ltd, and subsequently to Cabot Financial. The judge found that the transfer documents contained unexplained redactions and undefined terms, and that the schedules’ purpose was not always clear.
A central gap concerned the 2015 transfer from Ulster Bank to Promontoria (Finn) Ltd. Its schedule referred to a 2008 loan offer involving Darren Hanney and First Active plc, but did not provide an account number or enough detail to establish that it was the loan in these proceedings. The loan documents themselves referred to Ulster Bank, and the court said there was no evidence showing that the loan had been made by First Active or formed part of its banking business.
The judge also questioned how Cabot could confidently state what was owed when its director acknowledged that the company did not hold account statements from some earlier owners of the debt. The earliest statement produced covered 2015 to 2018. Correspondence from Ulster Bank referred to a possible tracker-rate error and a €15,228.12 payment described as redress and compensation, but did not specify any potential overcharge.
The defendant, who represented himself, alleged that the original agreement had been affected by fraud and challenged the redactions. The judge described the fraud assertions as weak and unsupported by evidence. He said the decision to adjourn did not mean the defendant had established a defence, and Cabot might still be able to address the evidential gaps and prove its case.
The matter was adjourned for mention on 1 May 2025 to finalise orders. The judge gave a provisional view that the defendant should receive any recoverable costs of the summary judgment application and invited the parties to agree proposed directions before the case was sent to the Non-Jury list for further management.