Claim arising from demands for repayment of bank loans was vexatious and bound to fail

Commercial law – receivership – demands for repayment of loans – Belgard Retail Park Tallaght – whether the plaintiff’s claim is vexatious, factually unsustainable and factually bound to fail – whether the plaintiff’s pleadings are defective in that they have failed to furnish adequate particulars pursuant to Order 19, Rule 5(2) – bank is estopped from relying upon its strict contractual entitlement as against the plaintiffs by reason of a “course of dealing” between the parties – whether the bank’s claim represents an unwarranted interference of the plaintiffs’ right of access to the courts – estoppel – plaintiffs’ argument relating to the claim of estoppel and the plaintiffs’ right of appropriation could not succeed – whether the plaintiffs could establish a prima facia case of mala fides in respect of the bank’s exercise of its contractual rights to demand repayment of the loans – Ulterior motive – court should exercise its discretion against allowing the issue to proceed to plenary hearing – no evidence that the bank engineered a loan default on the part of the plaintiffs – motion to dismiss plaintiff’s claim granted.