In AIB Mortgage Bank -v- O'Toole & anor [2016] IEHC 368 the High Court determined that a bank was not prevented from relying on a mortgage as security for all sums due by the defendants, despite issuing a redemption statement which omitted this fact.

In order to understand this case, it is necessary to set out the chronology of events:

Two recent judgments have brought further clarity in relation to the rights acquirers of loan portfolios to enforce against borrowers:

In April 2016, the Pensions Authority published prescribed guidance in relation to the Section 48A procedure under the Pensions Act 1990 (as amended) (the “Pensions Act”).

In a significant recent judgment, the High Court has set aside an extension of a protective certificate issued to a debtor under the Personal Insolvency Act 2012 on the grounds of material and culpable non-disclosure by a personal insolvency practitioner.

In Murphy -v- O'Flynn & anor [2016] IEHC 197 a liquidator sought an order from the Court restricting William and Deirdre O’Flynn from acting as directors pursuant to Section 150 of the Companies Act 1990.

Applicable Law 

The High Court (Binchy J), has recently made restriction orders in respect of directors in two separate applications before it.

In McAteer & anor v McBrien & ors [2016] IEHC 229, the High Court made an order restricting three directors pursuant to Section 150 of the Companies Act 1990 (now Section 819 of the Companies Act 2014).  The first named respondent (A) was the husband of the second named respondent (B) and father of the third named respondent (C) and all were directors of the Company on the date of the liquidation.

Background

Letters of demand frequently request a party to comply with certain obligations by “close of business”. However, due to the uncertainty surrounding what this phrase means, the Supreme Court was recently asked to determine what time is close of business. 

Background

A mortgage deed provided that money owed by the borrower to the bank was repayable on demand and that if a demand was not satisfied, the bank could enforce its security by appointing a receiver. 

A termination notice served on a tenant is invalid if it does not specifically state that the landlord intends to enter into a binding agreement to sell the property within three months of the termination of the lease, the High Court held on 5 April 2016.

Details of the Case

A recent Supreme Court decision looked at the effect of non-registration of the change of ownership of a charge on its enforcement.