Judgment: 2015-04-22 · Court archive

Court of Appeal allows bank’s appeal over Cullinanes’ summons

The court ruled that Allied Irish Banks’ special endorsement of claim met the court rules, but the appeal concerned only the striking out of the summons.

The Court of Appeal · [2015] IECA 88

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Allied Irish Banks plc (Appellant)
  • Raymond Cullinane
  • Joan Cullinane (Respondent)
  • Kelly J.
  • Binchy J.
  • Eileen Pierce
What

The court ruled that Allied Irish Banks’ special endorsement of claim met the court rules, but the appeal concerned only the striking out of the summons.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

The Court of Appeal has allowed Allied Irish Banks plc’s appeal against an order striking out its summons against Raymond Cullinane and Joan Cullinane, ruling that the bank’s special endorsement of claim complied with the rules of court.

The appeal concerned an order made by High Court judge Binchy J. on 24 November 2014, after an application for summary judgment was transferred to his list as a contested case. The judge struck out both the bank’s motion for judgment and its summons, following a ruling in a separate case involving the bank and Eileen Pierce.

The bank initially appealed the entirety of the order. In written submissions, however, it said it would not pursue the appeal against the striking out of its motion for judgment. The appeal proceeded only in relation to the summons.

The Court of Appeal heard the case alongside the Pierce appeal. Kelly J. said the issue with the summons’ special endorsement of claim was the same in both cases and that this appeal was governed by the result in Pierce’s case. He allowed the appeal for the same reasons, holding that the endorsement conformed to the court rules and was not defective.

The judgment does not state that the summary judgment application was decided, nor does it give the underlying claim’s amount or subject. The court’s stated disposal was limited to the appeal concerning the summons.

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