Court of Appeal: 1) dismisses appeal of High Court order for summary judgment in the sum of €1,472,996.95 arising from the default of loan repayments, on the grounds that High Court judge was correct in his conclusion that the defendant had not demonstrated the existence of a bona fide defence to the proceedings; and 2) dismisses appeal of High Court dismissal of plenary proceedings concerning whether the appointment of a receiver was unlawful, on the grounds that, having regard to the relevant statutory provisions and the evidence adduced, it cannot be stated that the High Court judge erred in law or in fact when she concluded that the receiver was validly appointed, and that his appointment did not need to be made by deed under the seal of the bank.
Summary judgment – plenary proceedings concerning whether appointment as receiver was unlawful – lending history between the parties – appeal of High Court granting of summary judgment in the sum of €1,472,996.95 arising from the default of loan repayments – whether Danske restructured his loans without his consent – legal principles to be applied on an application for summary judgment – High Court judge was correct in his conclusion that Mr. Fox had not demonstrated the existence of a bona fide defence to the proceedings – High Court judge was correct in his conclusion that Mr. Fox had not demonstrated the existence of a bona fide defence to the proceedings – appeal of summary judgment dismissed – whether there was evidence to support the trial judge’s conclusion that the receiver was validly appointed – both appeals dismissed.