Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 DECEMBER 2015

Proving Banks Debts: Clarity At Last

Maples Group
Maples Group
Contributor
Maples Group

Maples Group

The Maples Group, through its leading international law firm, Maples and Calder, advises global...

View firm profile
Explore more from Maples Group

The Supreme Court judgments in Ulster Bank Ireland Limited v O'Brien (16 December 2015) bring long overdue common sense to the law relating to proof of bank debts.

IrelandFinance and Banking

The Supreme Court judgments in Ulster Bank Ireland Limited v O'Brien (16 December 2015) bring long overdue common sense to the law relating to proof of bank debts. Until now there had been several High Court decisions which introduced undue complexity to the process. These decisions held that unless the plaintiff bank could show that it had complied with the Bankers' Books Evidence Act 1879 (as amended) (the "BBEA") its evidence would be hearsay. O'Brien establishes that focusing on BBEA procedures is inappropriate and unfair. Inappropriate, because a bank does not necessarily need to rely on "bankers' books" in order to prove a contract of loan, a breach by the borrower and the amount due. Unfair, because those decisions seem to preclude a bank proving its case in the same way as any other commercial creditor.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from