Sumary of ‘Far-reaching vexatious claims’ a ‘regular’ feature’ in certain cases, judge says:
- A High Court judge has said “far-reaching vexatious claims” designed to frustrate receiverships or the realisation of security after default on loans, have unfortunately become a “regular feature” of certain litigation before the courts.
- Mr Justice Michael Twomey, in a judgment halting Séamus Duffy’s case arising from efforts to recover a €2.3 million debt on foot of loans to buy properties in Louth and Monaghan, said the case was an example of such litigation.
- Mr Duffy, a personal litigant, with addresses at Longfield, Castleblayney, Co Monaghan and Saunders Road, Spencer Dock, Dublin, initiated proceedings in 2018 against Permanent TSB, Havbell DAC, a fund which took over Mr Duffy’s PTSB loans, and Aidan Murphy, a receiver appointed by Havbell.
- PTSB entered no appearance and, in a pre-trial application, Havbell and Mr Murphy sought orders striking out the case.
- On Thursday, Mr Justice Twomey concluded there was no evidence to support the claims by Mr Duffy and they were “mere assertions lacking any credible basis”.
- He had “no hesitation” striking out the case as bound to fail and frivolous and vexatious.
- Final orders will be made after the sides have considered his judgment.
- Case background Outlining the background, the judge noted PTSB had in 2007 and 2008 extended loan facilities to Mr Duffy and his wife Yvonne in respect of lands in Dundalk, Co Louth, and Castleblayney, leading to an outstanding debt of some €2.3 million.