The High Court has dismissed Noel Martin’s application to have a bankruptcy petition brought by National Asset Loan Management DAC (NALM) proceed by plenary hearing or to cross-examine four witnesses on their affidavits.
Mr Justice Mark Sanfey ruled on 26 August 2024 that Martin did not need an oral hearing to resolve 38 issues he raised before the petition itself was heard. The judge said Martin needed to persuade the judge hearing the petition that a “real and substantial issue” existed over whether the debt relied on by NALM met the statutory threshold. If such an issue is established, the petition cannot satisfy that requirement and must fail, the judgment records as NALM’s accepted position.
The judge stressed that he was not hearing the petition and did not determine whether the debt was owed, whether the 38 issues were relevant, or whether any issue raised a substantial challenge. Whether cross-examination or a plenary hearing is needed would be for the judge hearing the petition to decide if an issue requiring resolution is identified.
NALM’s petition followed a demand for €9,451,977.65 relating to loan facilities made available to Martin and his brother Patrick Martin. A bankruptcy summons was served on Noel Martin in October 2017. He did not pay or secure the sum demanded and did not apply to dismiss the summons. The judgment says it was undisputed that this amounted to an act of bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act 1988.
Martin’s application, issued in October 2022, came after years of related proceedings concerning a receiver appointed over interests in properties in Monaghan and Louth. In 2019, the High Court refused the brothers leave to pursue certain non-damages counterclaim reliefs against NALM, finding that they had not raised a substantial issue for that purpose. The current judgment recounts that prior decision as background; it does not determine the present petition on that basis.
At the petition hearing, Martin disputes the amount said to be owed and contends that his assets exceed his liabilities. NALM argued that the matters he raised did not establish a real and substantial issue. Justice Sanfey said that assessment could be made on the affidavit evidence and legal principles without first resolving all 38 issues through cross-examination.
The petition was listed for mention on 14 October 2024 so the judge in charge of the bankruptcy list could consider how it should proceed. The judge’s preliminary view was that NALM was entitled to its costs of resisting Martin’s application. Either party could file written submissions on costs or other orders within 14 days; the costs order was not finalised in the judgment.