Supreme Court dismisses appeal from High Court, and affirms dismissal of claim by borrowers against bank seeking to invalidate the appointment of a receiver over six investment properties, where the borrowers contended that the failure of the bank to register a cross-border merger on the register of the title created a potential liability to purchasers of the property, on the grounds that any defect of title would be an issue for the receiver and the bank, but not the borrowers.
Dunne J (nem diss): Dismissal of claim in High Court (McGovern J) - purchase of six investment properties by plaintiffs - funding from building society - refinanced by defendant bank - borrowings of €1.4 million - default on loan facilities (interest only) - appointment of receiver - action brought to invalidate appointment - dismissal by High Court (Gilligan J) of bulk of claim other than three issues: issue of securitisation; alleged breach of Central Bank Code of Practice; effect of s. 64 and s. 90 of the Registration of Title Act 1964 - effect of cross-border merger of banks on the appointment of the receiver - no registration of transfer in Register of Title - whether transfer effected by operation of law - Cross-Border Merger Directive (05/56/EC) - European Communities (Cross-Border) Mergers Regulations 2008 (S.I. 157 of 2008) - previous decision of Supreme Court on near identical issue of cross-border merger - whether mortgagors might be liable to subsequent purchasers of properties on the basis that the receiver sold as agent for mortgagors - reliance by mortgagors on minority judgment - issue of non est factum - whether document signed was fundamentally different from the document the mortgagors thought they were signing - defect in title arising from failure to register transfer - whether likely to be an issue for the mortgagors.