Proceedings seeking damages for manifest breaches of EU law are vexatious and bound to fail

Cross-motions before the court - plenary proceedings seeking Francovich/Köbler damages for manifest infringements of EU law by a court of last resort - plaintiffs' motion for judgment in default of defence - defendants' motion to have proceedings struck out as fraudulent or vexatious or bound to fail - High Court directed that defendants’ motion should be heard first as, if unsuccessful, the defendants would then be ordered to deliver a defence within a defined time - damages sought arising from judgments given in proceedings challenging a Direction Order at the time of the financial crisis in 2011 providing for the Minister for Finance to acquire 99.2% of a holding company that owned a bank - company compelled to issue large number of new shares at price dictated by the Minister and not under control of company and shareholders - Memorandum and Articles of Association altered - decisions taken at EGM nullified - company delisted from London and Irish Stock Exchanges - legal provisions in effect disapplied insofar as the company was concerned - High Court referred a question under Article 267 TFEU as to the compatibility of such a Direction Order with Second Council Directive 77/91/EEC of 13 December 1976 on coordination of safeguards in respect of the formation of public limited liability companies - Court of Justice found that such a Direction Order would not infringe the Directive - applied by the High Court to the case and proceedings dismissed - plaintiffs refused leapfrog appeal to Supreme Court - Court of Appeal affirmed decision of High Court - whether stateable case that plaintiffs entitled to damages for a manifest breach of EU law by a court from which there was no appeal - whether proceedings were an attempt to reopen arguments already made and lost by the plaintiffs concerning the correct interpretation of the Directive.