The High Court granted Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank summary judgment for €117,918.59 against Gerard Butterly and Emma Butterly, after finding that the two defences advanced did not provide a fair or reasonable probability of a real defence.
In a judgment delivered on 30 January 2018, Ms Justice Creedon considered the bank’s application for summary judgment. The loan was for €300,000, accepted in November 2007 and drawn down the following month. The defendants were to pay interest only for seven years, followed by capital and interest. The account fell into arrears, and the bank demanded repayment in January 2015. Summary proceedings were issued in August 2015.
A receiver appointed over a property at 51 Manydown Close, Dundalk, rented it for a period and sold it in June 2016. The sale proceeds of €190,167.31 were credited to the loan. The defendants argued that the property had been sold at an undervalue. They relied on a valuation they said they obtained in March 2016, which put the value at €220,000, and challenged the earlier valuations obtained by the bank.
The judge held that any complaint about the receiver’s conduct was against the receiver, who was not a party to the proceedings. The court concluded that a potential claim against a non-party did not provide a defence to the bank’s summary application.
The defendants also argued that a meeting with a bank employee in June 2015 had produced an agreement to extend interest-only payments for 12 months and remove the receiver. They said they relied on that agreement. The bank disputed that a binding variation had been made.
The court examined a letter sent by the defendants’ financial adviser to the bank in July 2015, which described an understanding that the bank would seek approval to remove the receiver and that interest-only payments would resume. The judge considered the wording tentative and said the letter suggested any agreement was “aspirational at best”. She found the alleged agreement did not establish a defence.
The ruling concerned whether the defendants had shown an arguable defence at the summary judgment stage. The court granted judgment for the amount of €117,918.59; the judgment does not state that the full demanded balance of €304,245.23 was awarded.