Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,091
Court 22 The Judge's List
I first visited Court 22 where Judge Linnane sits to hear cases referred to her by the Registrar's Court.
1&2 Stepstone vs. JC and AC
On 1 June, the Registrar had struck out this case and this was an appeal by Stepstone to overturn the Registrar's decision and reinstate the case. The loan had been bought by Promontory plc and they were also seeking to amend the proceedings to include Promontory plc as the plaintiff.
The borrowers were in court and had no objection at all to the proceedings. They are paying €1,800 per month.
The Judge upheld the appeal and vacated the Registrar's decision. She adjourned the case to her court for mention only on 7th December.
She asked if Promontoria's name was on the Folio and was told that it was not. She pointed out that this would have to be rectified by the next appearance.
BB Comment: The Registrar is meant to make the Judge's list more efficient. I don't know why the Registrar did not amend the proceedings when it came before her. It's possible that she does not have the power to do so.
7 EBS vs. TH and JH
Yet another case where EBS's paperwork was wrong. EBS were seeking to amend the proceedings as they had "EBS Mortgage Finance" in the proceedings whereas the mortgage was issued by EBS Building Society.
The barrister for the borrowers said that he had not seen the original civil bill. The Judge pointed out that as the solicitors had come on record for the borrower in April 2016, they had plenty of time to ask the bank for a copy of the civil bill. The barrister replied that the borrowers' solicitors had the civil bill, but it's just that the barrister had not seen it yet.
As the borrowers are making full repayments and as they seem to have some personal issues, the case was adjourned generally with liberty to re-enter.
BB Comment: Absolutely typical of EBS. They make it very difficult for themselves by having paperwork which is often wrong.
The Judge's decision to adjourn generally with liberty to re-enter is an approach used by all Registrars I have seen with the important exception of The Dublin Registrar who refuses such adjournments. She insists on the case being adjourned to a specific date where the lender is to proceed for an order or else to strike it out.
9 BoI vs PG
I had been in the court on 1 June last when this case first came up before the Judge. The borrower showed up then and the Judge told him that although the arrears were "low", she would have had to grant an order against him if he had not shown up. He was to ring MABS that day and make an appointment.
This time the Bank wanted to proceed as there had been no payment or no engagement since the last court appearance.
The arrears have risen from €5,000 when proceedings were issued in 2017 to €14,000 now.
The borrower was again in court. He had called MABS but they had not yet given him an appointment. He had not filled in the SFS. He had got some rooms in the house ready for renting and hoped to be able to start making repayments soon.
The Judge told him to go outside and talk to the MABS people and come back in a few minutes.
The bank wanted to proceed as no payments had been made since December last. But the Judge said that the arrears were low and adjourned it to 30th November. The bank asked that the adjournment be made peremptory - in other words that they would be granted an order on 30th November if the borrower had not made progress and the Judge refused.
BB Comment: On the one hand this guy has "low" arrears and shows up in court. On the other hand he hasn't paid anything since December and hasn't bothered contacting MABS or submitting an SFS.
11 Bank of Ireland vs. BL and BL
On 28th June the Registrar referred the case to the Judge's List as BoI applied for an adjournment and it was refused on the grounds that BoI had not sworn an affidavit explaining why they wanted an adjournment.
The Bank said that the borrowers were in a trial period and if the borrowers continued to make payments up to the Adjournment Date, the arrears would be capitalised.
The Judge suggested a general adjournment with liberty to re-enter and the Bank agreed that this would be a good solution.
BB Comment: Again, a good use of the general adjournment procedure. I will come back to this recent development of the Registrar refusing adjournments unless the bank puts the request on affidavit.
I first visited Court 22 where Judge Linnane sits to hear cases referred to her by the Registrar's Court.
1&2 Stepstone vs. JC and AC
On 1 June, the Registrar had struck out this case and this was an appeal by Stepstone to overturn the Registrar's decision and reinstate the case. The loan had been bought by Promontory plc and they were also seeking to amend the proceedings to include Promontory plc as the plaintiff.
The borrowers were in court and had no objection at all to the proceedings. They are paying €1,800 per month.
The Judge upheld the appeal and vacated the Registrar's decision. She adjourned the case to her court for mention only on 7th December.
She asked if Promontoria's name was on the Folio and was told that it was not. She pointed out that this would have to be rectified by the next appearance.
BB Comment: The Registrar is meant to make the Judge's list more efficient. I don't know why the Registrar did not amend the proceedings when it came before her. It's possible that she does not have the power to do so.
7 EBS vs. TH and JH
Yet another case where EBS's paperwork was wrong. EBS were seeking to amend the proceedings as they had "EBS Mortgage Finance" in the proceedings whereas the mortgage was issued by EBS Building Society.
The barrister for the borrowers said that he had not seen the original civil bill. The Judge pointed out that as the solicitors had come on record for the borrower in April 2016, they had plenty of time to ask the bank for a copy of the civil bill. The barrister replied that the borrowers' solicitors had the civil bill, but it's just that the barrister had not seen it yet.
As the borrowers are making full repayments and as they seem to have some personal issues, the case was adjourned generally with liberty to re-enter.
BB Comment: Absolutely typical of EBS. They make it very difficult for themselves by having paperwork which is often wrong.
The Judge's decision to adjourn generally with liberty to re-enter is an approach used by all Registrars I have seen with the important exception of The Dublin Registrar who refuses such adjournments. She insists on the case being adjourned to a specific date where the lender is to proceed for an order or else to strike it out.
9 BoI vs PG
I had been in the court on 1 June last when this case first came up before the Judge. The borrower showed up then and the Judge told him that although the arrears were "low", she would have had to grant an order against him if he had not shown up. He was to ring MABS that day and make an appointment.
This time the Bank wanted to proceed as there had been no payment or no engagement since the last court appearance.
The arrears have risen from €5,000 when proceedings were issued in 2017 to €14,000 now.
The borrower was again in court. He had called MABS but they had not yet given him an appointment. He had not filled in the SFS. He had got some rooms in the house ready for renting and hoped to be able to start making repayments soon.
The Judge told him to go outside and talk to the MABS people and come back in a few minutes.
The bank wanted to proceed as no payments had been made since December last. But the Judge said that the arrears were low and adjourned it to 30th November. The bank asked that the adjournment be made peremptory - in other words that they would be granted an order on 30th November if the borrower had not made progress and the Judge refused.
BB Comment: On the one hand this guy has "low" arrears and shows up in court. On the other hand he hasn't paid anything since December and hasn't bothered contacting MABS or submitting an SFS.
11 Bank of Ireland vs. BL and BL
On 28th June the Registrar referred the case to the Judge's List as BoI applied for an adjournment and it was refused on the grounds that BoI had not sworn an affidavit explaining why they wanted an adjournment.
The Bank said that the borrowers were in a trial period and if the borrowers continued to make payments up to the Adjournment Date, the arrears would be capitalised.
The Judge suggested a general adjournment with liberty to re-enter and the Bank agreed that this would be a good solution.
BB Comment: Again, a good use of the general adjournment procedure. I will come back to this recent development of the Registrar refusing adjournments unless the bank puts the request on affidavit.