Judgment: 2019-07-31 · Court archive

High Court rejects claim that London apartment charge was to be released

The court dismissed David Langan’s claims over the charge and its transfer to Promontoria, but left the lender’s €4.3 million counterclaim for a further hearing on the terms of any order.

High Court, Commercial · [2019] IEHC 602

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • David Langan (Plaintiff)
  • Promontoria (Aran) Limited
  • Classic Furniture Limited
  • Neil Kinsella
What

The court dismissed David Langan’s claims over the charge and its transfer to Promontoria, but left the lender’s €4.3 million counterclaim for a further hearing on the terms of any order.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Apartment 902
  • London
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court has rejected David Langan’s claim that Ulster Bank agreed to release its charge over a London apartment, and his challenge to the transfer of his loans and security to Promontoria (Aran) Limited. The court refused the reliefs he sought. It did not make a final order on Promontoria’s counterclaim for €4,309,428, saying it would hear counsel about the terms of any order sought.

The High Court has rejected David Langan’s claim that Ulster Bank agreed to release its charge over a London apartment, and his challenge to the transfer of his loans and security to Promontoria (Aran) Limited. The court refused the reliefs he sought. It did not make a final order on Promontoria’s counterclaim for €4,309,428, saying it would hear counsel about the terms of any order sought.

In a judgment delivered on 31 July 2019, Mr Justice Twomey found that no binding agreement to release the charge over Apartment 902, Belvedere Heights, London, had been made. Langan relied chiefly on a May 2008 email from his Ulster Bank relationship manager, Neil Kinsella, saying the bank had agreed to release the apartment subject to a satisfactory valuation of a commercial lease held by Langan’s company, Classic Furniture Limited (CFL).

The court considered that email alongside other records and testimony. It preferred Kinsella’s evidence, supported by bank notes made around the time, that the proposed release was also conditional on Langan obtaining €500,000 from another lender to invest in CFL. That funding was not secured. The judge concluded that the valuation condition alone did not make the release binding and rejected Langan’s alternative claim that the emails represented that the charge would be released.

The judgment described CFL as facing financial pressure in 2008 and noted that Langan had borrowed €500,000 from Ulster Bank that April to invest in the company. The bank facility letters continued to list the London apartment as security. The court also relied on later events, including Langan’s failure to offer the apartment as security when seeking emergency funding in December 2008, and his response to a bank email in March 2009 listing the charge.

Langan also argued that the assignment of the loans and security to Promontoria was invalid because he had not consented and because the transfer documents were defective. The court rejected both arguments. It found that written notice had been given and that the transfer documents covered the relevant facilities, seven guarantees and charge. It also noted that Langan had previously sought to negotiate settlement of the debt with Promontoria as the new owner of the loans.

Promontoria’s counterclaim seeks €4,309,428 under the loan facilities, guarantees and charge. The judgment did not determine the final order on that claim; it left that issue for counsel to address.

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