Former bank employee may be responsible for part of borrower’s losses

Plaintiff alleges second named defendant defrauded her in the context of their joint purchase and running of a pub - second defendant was an employee of the first defendant bank - fourth defendant was an employee of the third defendant bank and the plaintiff claims he engaged in a negligent misstatement by introducing her to the second defendant as a reliable person and was involved in the purchase of the pub - judgment deals with liability only - second defendant had fled the country after he had been arrested and interviewed in the course of a Garda investigation into his alleged fraudulent dealings with monies entrusted to him by a number of customers of the first named defendant - second defendant has not been located to date by the Gardaí and did not enter any appearance to these proceedings - proceedings were initiated in 2005 and relate to events that had taken place between 1999 and 2002 - outline and history of case - rejection of allegation of case of negligent misstatement against the third named defendant - vicarious liability of third and fourth defendants not established - no basis for personal injuries claim based on stress since 2002 - case of liability against first, third and fourth defendants has not been established.