National Asset Loan Management v Coyle

NAMA-logoIn this case (here), the Court dismissed an appeal by Coyle against the High Court grant of summary judgment, as the issues raised were matters of interpretation of contractual terms that could be resolved at the summary hearing and not a defence that could warrant a full plenary hearing.

Coyle had six loan facilities with Anglo Irish when its loans were transferred to NAMA. NAMA created six new accounts in Coyle’s name with corresponding loan facilities to the six Anglo accounts and transferred the funds from the NAMA accounts into the Anglo accounts. By this, the Anglo accounts were paid off and closed, and Coyle’s indebtedness was transferred to NAMA. Coyle argued that this meant that his indebtedness to Anglo was resolved and he had no contractual relationship with NAMA by which it could enforce the loans. The issue was whether this was an arguable defence.

Clarke J, dismissing the appeal, held that the issue was one of contractual interpretation, that the Anglo loan facility letters expressly contemplated set-off and that Coyle had not therefore presented any arguable case.

Advertisements
Leave a comment

1 Comment

  1. 2014 Review: April | scoirl

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: