By Ruth Mercer
The Court of Appeal has dismissed Sean Dunne’s appeal over the handling of motions challenging the appointment of official assignees in his long-running bankruptcy.
Mr Dunne was adjudicated bankrupt in Ireland in July 2013. His bankruptcy was later extended to 14 years and nine months because of what the High Court found to be material non-cooperation, leaving him due for discharge on 29 April 2028.
In July 2024, Mr Dunne sought declarations by motion that Michael Ian Larkin and Christopher Lehane had not been validly appointed as official assignees. He later issued six additional motions, including applications concerning documents, parties and the recusal of High Court judge Kennedy J.
Kennedy J. refused to recuse himself and held that the substantive challenge could not properly be pursued by motion within the bankruptcy proceedings. The motions were dismissed in December 2024.
Delivering the appeal judgment on 21 November 2025, Mr Justice Charles Meenan agreed. He held that the Rules of the Superior Courts required claims of this kind to be brought through proper originating proceedings, such as plenary proceedings, rather than by motion in the bankruptcy list.
The court also rejected Mr Dunne’s claim of objective bias. His arguments included Kennedy J.’s previous role as a senior partner in A&L Goodbody, alleged connections with creditors, LinkedIn contacts and an alleged relationship with counsel for the respondents.
The Court of Appeal found those claims unsupported by evidence. Kennedy J. had explained that he had not acted for Mr Dunne, was not involved in earlier litigation against him and had no relevant financial interest.
The appeal was dismissed. Importantly, the ruling does not decide whether the official assignees were validly appointed: Mr Dunne has since issued separate plenary proceedings raising that question, which remained ongoing when this judgment was delivered.