There is a summary procedure in the High Court, which may be used in cases where a full hearing or so-called \u201cplenary\u201d hearing of witnesses is or may be unnecessary. This may occur where there is little or no dispute as to the fact. In summary cases, the evidence can be heard on written affidavit.<\/p>\n
The summary summons procedure is substantially shorter and does not involve full pleadings such as statements of claims and defenses etc. \u00a0A claimant may obtain summary judgment quickly relatively quickly. Many such cases are debt collection or land recovery cases, where there is no real or substantial dispute.<\/p>\n
The Summary procedure may be used in the High Court in the following type of case<\/p>\n
The Summary procedure may also be used in relation to recovery of land against a tenant whose term has expired or been determined by notice to quit or for rent. There are number of other type of case in which a summary procedure may be used, including where \u00a0all the parties consent.<\/p>\n
The summary procedure may be used for breach of contract where there is an unconditional obligation to pay a debt a fixed or ascertainable sum. In cases, where damages are sought, they must usually be assessed by the court in a full\u00a0 \/ plenary hearing. be used. If the case is not defended, the court may refer the case for ascertainment and measurement of damages to \u00a0judge who will hear (uncontroverted) oral evidence of the quantity of damage and make an award accordingly.<\/p>\n
The summary procedure may be used in the following cases<\/p>\n
In the case of a liquidated sum, the sum must be ascertainable or capable of being mathematically ascertained. This will not be the case where damages need to be ascertained or measured. Similarly, it may also be the case where the claim is to pay reasonable value or sum in the case of restitution.<\/p>\n
A special form of High Court summons is used in summary cases. A special endorsement is provided, which specifically sets out all particulars of the claim, the relief claimed and the grounds on which it is based. In the case of a claim for money due, it must state the date of the contract and\u00a0 the condition by which the money is due. In the case of recovery of property details of the tenancy and its termination must be given. The case must give sufficient particulars to the defendant to allow it decide whether to defend or not.<\/p>\n
Where\u00a0 a liquidated sum is \u00a0claimed, the summons must state the amount claimed\u00a0 for costs and must \u00a0state that on payment of this sum within six days of service, that \u00a0proceedings will be stayed. If the defendant fails to enter an appearance within eight days, the claimant can obtain judgment in the Central Office without the matter proceeding to Court. This happens in the majority of the debt collection cases. The cases never appear in the case lists, nor are they mentioned in Court. Final judgment is entered by giving proof of the service of the claim and proving the debt by filing an affidavit setting out the claim.<\/p>\n
Under the summary procedure judgment in the Central Office may be obtained, if there is no appearance entered. If the defendant enters an appearance, the plaintiff may not proceed to obtain judgment in the Central Office, but must issue a motion to seek final judgment before the Master of the High Court.<\/p>\n
The claim is proved by affidavit. The affidavit will set out the factual basis on which the plaintiff claims entitlement to the order sought. The claimant\/plaintiff must state that there is no bona fide defence.\u00a0If the defendant does not appear and the matter is uncontested, the Master must be satisfied as to service before dealing with the matter.<\/p>\n
If the case is contested, time may be allowed to the defendant to file a replying affidavit. The Master may give directions on the required timing. This may cause the plaintiff to file a further affidavit. The parties affidavits will disclose whether there is a genuine claim and defence. The Master may grant judgment and satisfy that there is no genuine defence.<\/p>\n
If the Master is satisfied that the affidavits and other papers are in order and that the case is ready for hearing, he may transfer the case to the Judge\u2019s list for hearing at the first opportunity. Alternatively, he \u00a0may adjourn the case for plenary hearing, and the Master may make directions as appropriate for pleadings and discovery.<\/p>\n
If there is a factual dispute, then a summary disposal of the matter will not be possible. It is possible to apply to cross-examine a person who has made an affidavit in order to resolve disputes about facts. The Master may dismiss application and grant judgment or \u00a0grant leave to defend, with or without a full hearing.<\/p>\n
If the defendant can show that there is a substantial defence, then the Master of the High Court may be persuaded to transfer the case to the judge’s list. Otherwise, liberty will be given to enter summary judgment summarily.<\/p>\n
The High Court considers whether to give summary judgment. If there is a bona fide defence, the\u00a0 matter may be adjourned to a full hearing. This would be appropriate where there are disputes of facts between the parties, which can best be resolved by a verbal oral hearing. Leave to defend may be given conditionally or on such terms as to \u00a0security, time or mode of trial as might be directed.<\/p>\n
Where a plaintiff has an uncontested claim but the defendant has a counterclaim, there is discretion as to whether to permit judgment for the uncontested element. The entire circumstances may be taken into account.<\/p>\n
Judgment may be given for part of the amount claimed. This may be undefended or they may be no tenable defence. The balance may be disputed.<\/p>\n
The motion for liberty to enter summary judgment should be granted where there is no serious conflict as to a matter of fact and no real question of law arises. There must be credible evidence of a real bona fide defence to the claim.<\/p>\n
The Court must be satisfied that there is a fair and reasonable probability of the defendant having a real, credible, real and bona fide defence . The mere assertion of circumstances, which would constitute a defence would not be enough. There must be credible evidence to support the defence.\u00a0The defendants hurdle is relatively low. It must be clear \u00a0that the defendant has no case.<\/p>\n
Judgment may be obtained in a foreign currency.<\/p>\n
The Judge may make an award of interest for the period from the date the relevant event until \u00a0the date of the judgment under the Courts Act. The Master may exercise discretion to award interest\u00a0 under the Courts Act, in the case of judgment in default of defence.The Court registrars have power to award interest. It may be necessary to apply to Court in \u00a0order to make a judgment, inclusive of interest.<\/p>\n
Where there are a number of defendants, some of whom appear and some of whom do not, final judgment may be entered against those who do not appear, summarily \u00a0in the Central Office. Judgment can only be entered, where the affidavits and proof are in order.<\/p>\n
There are certain categories of case in which summary judgment is not permitted. This includes certain consumer credit and moneylender claims.<\/p>\n
Where a summary has been entered, the Court may on application may vary or set it aside. This will generally only happen where there was some irregularity in the procedure or where the defendant has a good defence and justice requires that he be given the \u00a0to defend the claim.<\/p>\n
Judgment may be given for part of the amount claimed. This may be undefended or they may be no tenable defence. The balance may be disputed.<\/p>\n\n
There is a summary procedure in the High Court, which may be used in cases where a full hearing or so-called \u201cplenary\u201d hearing of witnesses is or may be unnecessary. This may occur where there is little or no dispute as to the fact. In summary cases, the evidence can be heard on written affidavit. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[322],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3924"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3924"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3924\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":29380,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3924\/revisions\/29380"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3924"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3924"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3924"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}