The High Court has allowed a plaintiff’s appeal against an order extending the defendants’ time to appeal a Circuit Court decision in a dispute over cattle purchases and VAT refunds.
Mr Justice Meenan delivered judgment on 27 January 2020. The appeal concerned a Master of the High Court order of 10 May 2019, which gave the defendants a further 14 days to appeal the Circuit Court’s decision of 30 May 2018.
The Circuit Court had refused the defendants’ application to set aside the County Registrar’s decision to strike out their defence for failure to comply with a discovery order. It also granted the plaintiff judgment for €65,837.90, together with costs. The High Court judgment records those earlier decisions; the appeal before Mr Justice Meenan concerned the extension of time to appeal.
The underlying proceedings arose from an alleged agreement, made in or about November 2011, under which the defendants were to act as the plaintiff’s agent in buying cattle and arrange transport to the United Kingdom. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants agreed to provide details of VAT claims and refunds, and claimed entitlement to the refunds.
An order for discovery was made by consent on 16 February 2017, requiring bank statements, animal purchase invoices and documents about VAT refunds. The defendants did not provide discovery within the six weeks allowed. The County Registrar struck out their defence on 20 July 2017, but stayed that order for three weeks to allow discovery to be made. The High Court said the defendants had about 23 weeks in total to comply.
The judgment records that the defendants’ solicitor had written in May 2017 seeking more time to compile the documents. A year later, the plaintiff’s solicitors offered to consider whether the defence should be reinstated if an affidavit of discovery was provided by 28 May 2018. None was provided, and the judgment said there was no indication the defendants intended to comply.
Applying principles from the Supreme Court decision in Éire Continental Trading Company Ltd v Clonmel Foods Ltd, Mr Justice Meenan concluded that the defendants had not established an arguable ground of appeal against the order striking out their defence. He said the affidavits did not provide a plausible explanation for the failure to make discovery, and that difficulties between the defendants and their former solicitor did not explain non-compliance.
The High Court held that the Master had erred in extending the appeal time and allowed the plaintiff’s appeal. It did not specify consequential orders in the judgment, stating that it would hear counsel on those orders.