Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Dispute over debts incurred through purchase of office supplies must be resolved at plenary hearing
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses to grant order for summary judgment in the amount of €239,636.49 - being monies due on foot of the supply of till rolls to the defendant company from 2008 to 2015, on the grounds that the defences put forward, based on alleged abuse by the plaintiff company of its dominant position in the market and of certain assertions and assurances given to the defendant company by the plaintiff, are not fanciful but based on documentation, and can therefore only be resolved by way of a full plenary hearing.
Summary judgment - €239,636.49 due and owing since September 2014 - supply of office equipment including till rolls since 2008 - agreement by plaintiff to accept reduced sum on foot of defendant's loss making business accounts - intended counterclaim of defendant surrounding supply of till rolls to defendant by plaintiff - alleged agreement from plaintiff to park a portion of debt owed to it by defendant in return for the continuing purchase of its till rolls by the defendant at a reduced price - €107,683.10 reduction of defendant's liabilities applied - test to be applied on application for summary judgment - whether 'very clear' defendant has no case? - conflict of issues - abuse of plaintiff's dominant position - trust placed in plaintiff company - issues must be resolved at plenary hearing - defence not fanciful but based on documentation
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
