Judgment: 2017-03-02 · Court archive

Court of Appeal rejects director’s bid to represent company in bank dispute

The court dismissed Adrian Flynn’s appeal, finding no exceptional circumstances to let him act as advocate for Aqua Fresh Fish Limited.

The Court of Appeal · [2017] IECA 77

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Allied Irish Banks plc
  • Aqua Fresh Fish Limited (Defendant)
  • Adrian Flynn
What

The court dismissed Adrian Flynn’s appeal, finding no exceptional circumstances to let him act as advocate for Aqua Fresh Fish Limited.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • County Louth
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

In a judgment delivered on 8 February 2017, Mr Justice William McKechnie said the rule remained binding, subject to a court’s discretion to permit a non-lawyer to represent a company in exceptional circumstances. He rejected Flynn’s reliance on the company’s unusual fish-farming business, the time it took to establish operations, his control of the company and its lack of funds as grounds for such an exception.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Adrian Flynn, a director and shareholder of Aqua Fresh Fish Limited, who sought permission to represent the company himself in its dispute with Allied Irish Banks plc.

The bank had advanced money to the company, which granted it a first legal mortgage over lands in County Louth in 2010. The bank alleged that the company had defaulted on repayments and sought, among other relief, possession of the lands and their sale if necessary. The judgment does not decide the underlying loan or possession claim.

Flynn had been allowed to enter an appearance for the company, but the High Court refused his later application to act as its advocate. He appealed that refusal. He argued that the company could not afford a solicitor or barrister, that it had a defence, and that changes in Irish and European law undermined the rule that companies must generally be represented by lawyers. He also said the company’s circumstances qualified for an exception to that rule.

In a judgment delivered on 8 February 2017, Mr Justice William McKechnie said the rule remained binding, subject to a court’s discretion to permit a non-lawyer to represent a company in exceptional circumstances. He rejected Flynn’s reliance on the company’s unusual fish-farming business, the time it took to establish operations, his control of the company and its lack of funds as grounds for such an exception.

McKechnie said financial hardship alone would rarely justify an exception. He considered himself bound by the Supreme Court’s decision in Battle v Irish Art Promotion Centre Ltd, which had refused a similar application where lack of funds was central. The Court of Appeal therefore could not allow Flynn to represent the company on that basis.

The court dismissed the appeal. The ruling concerned who could advocate for the company; it did not determine whether the company had defaulted or whether the bank was entitled to enforce its mortgage.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review