The High Court has refused an application by Aidan McGuinness to dismiss Ulster Bank Ireland Limited’s summary proceedings for want of prosecution, finding that the delay was excusable and that the case should continue.
Mr Justice MacGrath delivered judgment on 7 August 2020. The bank began the proceedings in May 2012, claiming €2,441,908.80 from six defendants in connection with a loan account and a current account. The judgment noted that the summons also stated a different total, €2,343,045.90. The bank said the accounts related to a commercial loan for the purchase of Miller House and 30 acres in Killala, County Mayo.
McGuinness, the second defendant, applied in August 2019 to dismiss the claim. He denied being liable for the accounts, said he received no money or benefit from the loan, and disputed the signatures attributed to him on the facility and mortgage documents. Those disputed liability issues were not decided in this application.
The bank accepted that the delay was inordinate. It argued that the delay was excusable because it pursued the property security before continuing against the defendants, dealt with complications involving the defendants, and engaged in settlement communications. The court considered those explanations across different periods, including the sale of Miller House and proceedings concerning Bartragh Island. It found that the sale process and subsequent communications were relevant to the delay, while also noting that some periods had little evidence explaining the inactivity.
The court concluded that, viewed as a whole, the delay was excusable. It also considered the alternative question of the balance of justice. McGuinness cited the length of time the case had remained unresolved, the deaths of two defendants, his age and health, and the effect of the proceedings on his reputation. The judge found no evidence that the delay had impaired his ability to defend the claim, which centred on documents and his denial of signing them. No witness unavailability or other specific prejudice was established.
The court held that the balance of justice favoured letting the proceedings continue and dismissed McGuinness’s application. It did not determine whether he signed the documents or owes any part of the claimed debt.