Jack O'Toole Ltd v MacEoin Kelly Associates

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date01 January 1987
Date01 January 1987
Docket Number[1984 No. 6051P]
CourtSupreme Court
(H.C., S.C.)
Jack O'Toole Ltd
and
MacEoin Kelly Associates

Limited company - Application by one defendant for security for costs in pending action - Plaintiff company unable to meet any order for costs - Whether plaintiff's impecunious state caused by wrong the subject matter of claim - Onus of proof on plaintiff - Standard of proof - Prima facie case -Discharge of onus - Whether bald statement sufficient - Supreme Court - Jurisdiction -Review of High Court discretion - Whether Supreme Court jurisdiction limited - Companies Act, 1963 (No. 33), s. 390.

The plaintiff, a building company formed for the purpose of contracting with the second defendant to build a large number of houses, commenced proceedings for damages for breach of contract against both the first defendant, the firm of architects appointed by the second defendant under the contract, and the second defendant. In its statement of claim the plaintiff alleged, inter alia, that the first defendant knowing the plaintiff's weak financial situation, had failed and neglected to measure, quantify and adjudicate on amounts of claims submitted by the plaintiff under the contract, thereby causing the plaintiff damage and loss. On the application of the first defendant for security for costs under s. 390 of the Companies Act, 1963, it was conceded on behalf of the plaintiff that it would be unable to pay the defendants' costs should they succeed in their defences. It was further stated in an affidavit filed on behalf of the plaintiff that because of the second defendant's actions the plaintiff "had to suspend its principal activity of contractor for public works." The High Court (Barr J.) refused the application, saying that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case that it had been put out of business by the wrong-doing of both defendants and that its inability to give security for costs was a consequence of that wrong-doing. On appeal by the first defendant against the refusal it was contended, inter alia, on behalf of the plaintiff that, in the absence of an error in principle on the part of the High Court in the exercise of the discretion under s. 390, the Supreme Court should not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
54 cases
  • Framus Ltd v CRH Plc
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 22 April 2004
    ...& VAN VEEN V STICHTING PENSIOENFONDS 1995 1 ECR 4705 COMPANIES ACT 1963 S390 RSC O. 99 r37(13) JACK O'TOOLE LTD V MACEOIN KELLY ASSOCIATES 1986 IR 277 THALLE V SOARES 1957 IR 182 LISMORE HOMES LTD (IN RECEIVERSHIP) V BANK OF IRELAND FINANCE LTD 1992 2 IR 57 RSC O.29 COMPANIES ACT 1908 S2......
  • Campus and Stadium Ireland Ltd v Dublin Waterworld Ltd
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 25 October 2007
    ...which would justify the refusal of orders for security for costs. As Finlay C.J. stated in O'Toole Limited v. MacEoin Kelly & Associates [1986] IR 277, at p.283: 74 "It is clear that there is no presumption, either in favour of the making of an order for security for costs or against it, bu......
  • Lismore Homes Ltd ((in Receivership)) v Bank of Ireland Finance Ltd
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 2 March 1992
    ...V BOGOFF 1962 IR 180 COMPANIES ACT 1963 S390 SEE CO LTD V PUBLIC LIGHTING SERVICES 1987 ILRM 255 JACK O'TOOLE LTD V MACEOIN KELLY LTD 1987 ILRM 269 PEARSON V NAYDLER 1977 1 WLR 899 BULA LTD V TARA MINES LTD (NO 3) 1987 IR 494 COMHLUCHT PAIPEAR RIOMHAIREACHTA TEO V UDARAS NA GAELTACHTA ......
  • Bula Ltd v Tara Mines Ltd (No. 3)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 17 July 1987
    ...LTD V BOGOFF 1962 IR 180, 97 ILTR 12 SEE LTD V PUBLIC LIGHTING SERVICES LTD 1987 ILRM 255 JACK O'TOOLE LTD V MACEOIN KELLY ASSOCIATES 1987 ILRM 269 PARKINSON V TRIPLAN LTD 1973 QBD 609 PEARSON V NAYDLER 1977 1 WLR 899, 1977 3 AER 531 Synopsis: PRACTICE Costs Security - Company - Insolv......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT