A couple who borrowed more than £300,000 for commercial investment purposes are jointly and severally liable for outstanding debts owing to the bank, a High Court judge has ruled.

Mr Justice Seán Ryan said the court had been told that Anne Hickey had parted company with her then partner Declan Porter in 2009, eight years after both had taken out loans with Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited.

The loans amounted to £212,000 for the purchase of a property at Páirc Mhuire, Saggart village, Co Dublin, and £100,000 for the refurbishment of the neighbouring dwelling at Páirc Mhuire.

The judge said Richard Downey, for Ms Hickey, had submitted that in 2009, such was the relationship between them that she required a High Court order preventing Mr Porter from watching and besetting the family home.

Assets transferred
He said Mr Porter had been excluded from Skeagh House, Kildare, at that time but there had been a reverse in the situation since and now Ms Hickey lived at Páirc Mhuire and Mr Porter lived at Skeagh House.

Mr Justice Ryan said that in December 2010, by cross-Border merger, all of the assets and liabilities of Bank of Scotland (Ireland) Limited transferred to Bank of Scotland plc.

The purchase loan had fallen into arrears in January 2009 and the bank demanded repayment from Ms Hickey and Mr Porter. No repayments had been made since and the bank was suing Ms Hickey for £155,841.73 as an equally liable borrower.

Mr Justice Ryan said Ms Hickey, who had described herself as a company director, did not dispute the material facts of the bank’s case but claimed a bona fide defence on grounds that Mr Porter had spent the great bulk of the money for his own purposes. She alleged that he had made her sign the documents.

Agreement
The bank claimed that under the mortgage agreement, Ms Hickey and Mr Porter had undertaken to use the loans for the purposes stated and that Ms Hickey had legal advice at all times.

Mr Justice Ryan said the court’s task was to apply existing tests of credibility to Ms Hickey’s proposed defence. He said a defendant could not escape liability by applying the loans to different purposes to that specified in the loan agreement or by consenting to such diversion.

It did not matter whether it was Ms Hickey or Mr Porter who spent the money on the extraneous purposes. Ms Hickey, who at all times had been represented by a solicitor, had provided no proof to suggest Mr Porter had exerted undue influence over her.

She had not established any defence to the bank’s claim for declarations that it held a mortgage charge over the property at Páirc Mhuire and that she was liable for the outstanding £155,841.73.

He granted the bank the declarations it sought.