Northern Irish businessman's bid to have £100m loans declared void thrown out of court

Madam Justice McBride struck out all grounds advanced by John Miskelly and his wife Helen in their case against Bank of Ireland

A Northern Irish businessman’s legal bid to have more than £100m in bank loans declared void is “uncontestably bad”, a High Court judge has ruled.

Madam Justice McBride struck out all grounds advanced by John Miskelly and his wife Helen in their case against Bank of Ireland.

“The continuation of this action would amount to an abuse of court,” she said.

Related proceedings against Anglo Irish Bank and National Asset Loan Management Ltd – an Irish NAMA agency dealing with underperforming loans – have already been either discontinued or thrown out.

Mr and Mrs Miskelly borrowed from various financial institutions in their role as directors in the company JAM (NI) Ltd, the court heard.

Loans obtained from Bank of Ireland to finance business ventures and transactions were either void or unenforceable, the couple claimed.

Those facilities were said to total more than £105m.

The plaintiffs alleged the loans were procured through an unfair relationship, and that the bank breached obligations under the Financial Services Authority (FSA) code of business source book.

Further breaches of the lending code and common law duty of care were also contended.

Mr and Mrs Miskelly sought a declaration that the loan agreements and assignments of

the facilities are null and void with no legal effect.

Delivering judgment on the bank’s application to have the claim against it struck out, Madam Justice McBride held that assertions by the couple had no real prospect of success.

“The pleadings do not set out how the bank gave improper or misleading financial advice which gave rise to loss,” she said.

No factual basis was established for claims about a breach of a duty of care.

Madam Justice McBride pointed out: “They consist of generalised allegations that the bank owed a duty to act as a prudent vendor when selling any rights or interests in their loan facilities.

“In the events which happened the bank did not sell the loans in the strict sense, rather, the loans were acquired by NAMA.”

She confirmed: “I am therefore satisfied that the entirety of the plaintiffs’ pleaded case against the bank is incontestably bad.

“I therefore strike out the case in its entirety against the bank.”


Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know.