Legal actions by Barclays against developers settled and struck out

LEGAL ACTIONS in which Barclays Bank sought €9 million judgment orders against well-known property developers David Courtney and Bernard Doyle over development loans have been settled and struck out at the Commercial Court.

Separate actions were brought against Mr Courtney, Belgrave Square, Rathmines, Dublin, and Mr Doyle, Waterside, Dargle Road, Bray, Co Wicklow, with the bank seeking orders for €4.5 million each against both men, plus interest.

Both men claimed the loans were issued in 2005 by Barclays Bank Ireland Ltd on a long-term basis as part of the bank’s “aggressive” attempt to get in on the Irish property market, particularly to bank the business of another well-known developer, Bernard McNamara.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly had ruled last June that both men had made out an arguable defence to the bank’s action and he fixed the case for hearing in May.

Yesterday, Hugh O’Keeffe, for the bank, said the case was settled and could be struck out against both defendants with no other order required. Rossa Fanning, for the defendants, consented and Mr Justice Kelly struck out the proceedings.

The loans related to a development at Finglas village, including 160 apartments and retail development, to be carried out by Marumba Properties Ltd, a company involving Mr Courtney, Mr Doyle and Mr McNamara.

Planning permission was granted in August 2004 but Barclays claimed “no stone has been turned” on the development and permission would expire last year with no extension likely.

The bank claimed repayment of the loan amounts in full was due by November 30th, 2007, and it had given some 13 extensions of the repayment date before repayment in full was demanded in March 2009.

In outlining the defence to those claims last June, Mr Fanning argued Barclays strongly induced his clients to move their business from First Active and sought to “curry favour” so as to bank the Thornton Hall prison project with which Mr McNamara was associated.

He argued that the bank’s decision to bring the summary proceedings was part of a strategy to exit the Irish property market and it was imposing “penal” interest repayment rates on his clients, who were up to date on interest repayments.