The High Court has refused Allied Irish Banks plc’s request for summary relief over a €91,000 guarantee and sent the dispute with Seamus O’Keeffe, Junior, to a plenary hearing.
In a judgment dated 5 February 2018, Mr Justice Max Barrett said the affidavit evidence raised factual conflicts that could not fairly be resolved through the summary procedure. The court did not decide whether Mr O’Keeffe signed the guarantee or whether he is liable. It held that AIB’s claim must proceed to a fuller hearing.
The continuing guarantee is dated 11 August 2011 and appears on its face to have been signed by Mr O’Keeffe in Cashel, County Tipperary, before an AIB official. Mr O’Keeffe submitted that he could not have signed it there that day because credit-card records appeared to place him buying tyres in Barking, Essex. He also said he had never met or encountered the official said to have witnessed the signature. No affidavit from that purported witness was before the court.
AIB argued that Mr O’Keeffe had not simply denied signing the guarantee, pointing to the wording of his affidavits, which repeatedly denied signing it on the date stated or in the manner alleged. The bank also suggested it might have been signed after the stated date, including on the following day. Justice Barrett described that as speculation and said the burden of proving its case rested with AIB.
The judge noted that after AIB demanded payment on 21 August 2012, a financial adviser wrote to the bank on Mr O’Keeffe’s instructions that he would not be able to satisfy the guarantee. Mr O’Keeffe later said he had been confused and had not then appreciated the basis of AIB’s claim. The court did not treat that earlier response as resolving the disputed circumstances of the guarantee.
Applying the principles for summary judgment and leave to defend, the court concluded it was not “very clear” that Mr O’Keeffe had no defence. The alleged signing location and date, his account of being in England, and the disputed witness account were issues for trial. The order was to decline summary relief and refer the matter to plenary hearing.