Sheridan v Allied Irish Banks Plc

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Haughton
• Judgment Date: 23 June 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] IECA 139
• Docket Number: Court of Appeal Record Number: 2021/154
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Year: 2022

Between/

John Sheridan

Plaintiff/Appellant

and

Allied Irish Banks Plc

Defendant/Respondent

[2022] IECA 139

McCarthy J.

Donnelly J.

Haughton J.

Court of Appeal Record Number: 2021/154

High Court Record Number: 2018/8090P

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Abuse of process – Frivolous and vexatious claims – Bound to fail – Appellant appealing against the order striking out his claim – Whether the claims which the appellant sought to pursue against the respondent were still frivolous and vexatious and bound to fail

Facts: The appellant, Mr Sheridan, appealed to the Court of Appeal against the order of the High Court (Allen J) dated 14 May 2021 striking out the appellant’s claim under O. 19 r. 28 of the Rules of the Superior Courts for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action and/or for being frivolous and vexatious, and ordering that the respondent, Allied Irish Banks Plc (AIB), do recover from the appellant the costs of the motion and the proceedings. In his notice of appeal, the appellant in Ground 1 asserted that the facts presented in the judgment of the trial judge were “factually incorrect”, and he purported to identify those in Grounds 4 and 5. In Ground 2 he asserted that he had new evidence supporting his version of the facts. In Ground 3 he objected to the use of a phrase by the trial judge describing his case as being “founded on a quixotic quest”. In Ground 6 he alleged that “fraud and misrepresentation have occurred”, and that AIB “had a fiduciary and professional duty to carry out due diligence and fell short in their duty”.

Held by Haughton J that even if the Court of Appeal were to permit an amendment to the claims in accordance with the amended statement of claim exhibited by the appellant, the claims which the appellant sought to pursue against AIB were still frivolous and vexatious and bound to fail, and were an abuse of the process. Haughton J dismissed the appeal.

Haughton J held that as the respondent had been entirely successful, it followed that AIB should be entitled to its costs from the appellant.

Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Haughton delivered on the 23rd day of June 2022

Index

Paragraph Title

Introduction	2
The pleaded claim before the High Court	2
The affidavits	3
Judgment in the High Court	8
The Appeal and application to admit new evidence	11
Discussion	11
Action solely for discovery	11
Proposed amendment to Statement of Claim to ‘save the claim’	13
Frivolous and vexatious/abuse of process	15
Statute of Limitations	19
Conclusion	20

Introduction

1 This is an appeal by against the order of the High Court (Allen J.) dated 14 May 2021 striking out the appellant's claim under O.19 r.28 of the Rules of the Superior Courts for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action and/or for being frivolous and vexatious, and ordering that the respondent (AIB) do recover from the appellant the costs of the motion and the proceedings. The appellant John Sheridan appeared as a litigant in person.

The pleaded claim before the High Court

2 The claim was initiated by Plenary Summons issued on 11 September 2018. The “General Indorsement of Claim” pleads –

“The cause of action is negligence.

The applicant's claim is as the sole executor of the estate of my late mother, Pauline Sheridan, who died on 27th of August 2016, who was the Administrator in Ireland as issued on 4th June, 1997 and as the Administrator of my late brother James Vincent Sheridan's estate.

A further grant of De Bonis Non, Letters of Administration were issued by the Irish Probate Office of the High Court 9th of May 2018 and also Letters of Administration were issued to the applicant in the United States of America in the Surrogates Court of the State of New York, Dutchess County on the 16th May 2018 in respect of the estate of my late brother.

Allied Irish Bank PLC has neglected to recognise my standing as the executor of Pauline Sheridan and the administrator of the estate of James Vincent Sheridan.

As the Administrator of the unadministered estate of James Vincent Sheridan, I am asking this Honourable Court for an order directing Allied Irish Banks PLC to release documents/records to me as administrator of the James Vincent Sheridan estate.”

3 No regular Statement of Claim was delivered, but the appellant delivered a Notice of Claim on 2 October 2018 which the parties agreed could be regarded as a Statement of Claim. This repeats the pleas in the Plenary Summons and pleads that monies of James Vincent Sheridan were transferred to two Irish registered companies Emerald Contract Cleaners Ltd (CRO 22322) and Emerald Contract Cleaners (Ire) Limited (CRO 148369). It is pleaded that AIB had refused to provide records “ both business and personal” relating to these companies, and that AIB were not recognising his standing “ as a director of both companies” and as a legal personal representative of James Vincent Sheridan. Under the heading “ NEGLIGENCE” he then pleads:-

• “1. Claimant is the personal representative and still holds himself out as director/shareholder or agent of both companies as ordered by Justice Mella Carroll.

• 2. The respondent, Allied Irish Bank PLC, which holds records belonging to both companies and James Vincent Sheridan's personal account in AIB Manhattan and AIB Ireland. AIB is neglecting to recognise the claimant's standing.

• 3. In 2016, the claimant received an affidavit from a relevant person, the original accountant/auditor of both companies. Mr. Fintan P. Flannelly stated that James Vincent Sheridan's monies were transferred from AIB Manhattan to both companies.

The claimant is asking this court to order [AIB] to release documents/records to me as Administrator in relation to –

• 1. James Vincent Sheridan personal account in AIB Manhattan, New York and AIB Ireland.

• 2. Emerald Contract Cleaners Limited (CRO 22322) formally [ sic] Emerald Contract Cleaners Ire Limited).

• 3. Emerald Contract Cleaners (Ire) Limited (CRO 148369).”

The Notice of Claim then lists, over eight bullet points, the bank documents which he seeks to have released by AIB, which include those relating to opening and closing the company accounts, all relevant bank statements, all transfers from “James Vincent Sheridan AIB account in Manhattan NY to AIB, Ireland and elsewhere” and all documents in the name of James Vincent Sheridan or James V. Sheridan connected to either of the companies.

4 The pleaded claim does not say why the appellant claimed release of the documents.

The affidavits

5 However, the purpose became apparent from the affidavit sworn by the appellant on 22 November 2018 to ground a Notice of Motion issued by the appellant on 26 November 2018 in these proceedings in which he sought discovery of the same documents the release of which is sought in the Notice of Claim. It should be noted that this discovery was sought before any defence was filed.

6 In that affidavit the appellant sets out his understanding, including allegations of fact that are contested, of the involved history prompting “ this application”. He avers that James Vincent Sheridan was blind, and at the age of 19 was killed in a car crash in New York on 20 December 1971. He suggests that at the date of his death his late brother held one share in CRO 22322, which company was incorporated in Ireland in 1965. He avers that he “ discovered” in 1995 that his brother Vincent was still a director of this company. He avers that his uncle James Valentine Sheridan changed the name of this company from Emerald Contract Cleaners Ireland Limited to Emerald Contract Cleaners Limited, and that a new company Emerald Contract Cleaners Limited (CRO 148369) was incorporated in Ireland in 1989 by James Valentine Sheridan, and that he “ discovered” in 2017 that sums of money were transferred from an AIB account in Manhattan into an AIB account in Dublin in his late brother Vincent's name. He avers that his late mother Pauline obtained a grant to James Vincent Sheridan's estate on 4 June 1997, and that as a personal representative she corresponded with AIB regarding his estate in 1999. He avers that AIB declined to furnish information or documents concerning the bank accounts of both companies because his mother was not a director and the information was confidential. As CRO 22322 was struck off the Register on 19 April 1999 (as it had ceased trading since 1989), his late mother Pauline presented a petition, on 4 December 2000, to restore CRO 22322 to the Register, holding herself out as a member based on James Vincent Sheridan having been a shareholder. Carroll J. initially made an order for restoration on 19 February 2001, but the appellant's uncle James Valentine Sheridan applied (on 6 December 2001) to vacate that order and dismiss the petition. Carroll J. vacated her order on 5 November 2002 and struck out the petition 1. In 2004 in correspondence the appellant's mother Pauline again tried to persuade AIB to release the accounts/documentation, and AIB refused for the same reasons given previously. Pauline Sheridan died on 27 August 2008, naming the appellant as her executor.

7 The appellant claims in his affidavit that an audit by the Revenue Commissioners of company CRO148369 disclosed that money in excess of £2,112,210 had been loaned to it by directors. He refers to evidence of Mr. Flannelly, who was auditor to both companies, confirming in 2017 that he had sight of transfers of £80,000, £90,000 and “at least £2,000,000 in the name of my deceased brother transferred by his father Patrick Francis Sheridan, from an account in AIB Manhattan to AIB Crumlin Cross and AIB Rathgar in to …company number 22322 and 148369”. He exhibits and relies on two affidavits of Mr. Flannelly which were sworn on 26 July 2017 and 5 June 2018 in the context of a Petition brought in 2017 by the appellant to have CRO22322 restored to...