[Bankrupt] Sean Quinn ordered to repay €417 million

As noted on Monday, the Dublin Commercial Court ruling on on an application by the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC) for the repayment of €2billion in loans which had been personally guaranteed by Sean Quinn was due today.  And RTÉ reports the outcome

The amount Mr Quinn has been ordered to repay is the largest summary judgment amount ever entered in the courts here against an individual.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly granted the order for almost €417m as it relates to sums of money that Mr Quinn has admitted that he owes and are therefore undisputed.

He said it would require extraordinary circumstances if he were to refuse judgment for sums of money the defendant admits that he owes.

The judge said there was a powerful case for him to grant judgment for the rest of the money.

He said there was no suggestion of a defence to the claim.

However, out of courtesy to the official receiver, Mr Justice Kelly said he would adjourn it until Monday afternoon.

Interest in the continuing complicated legal battle now turns to the Northern Ireland courts where the IBRC are to challenge Sean Quinn’s application for UK bankruptcy.   And the Irish Times report tells us

Mr Justice Kelly reserved judgment on the adjournment application and today said he was satisfied entry of summary judgment would not affect the bankruptcy proceedings in Northern Ireland or impermissibly cut across the jurisdiction of the NI High Court when it deals with the bank’s application tomorrow to annul the bankruptcy.

The judge said it appeared the hearing to annul the bankruptcy would not take place until next year and noted any decision in that could be appealed.

He was satisfied the official receiver would not be prejudiced by the entry of summary judgment but the bank could be prejudiced were summary judgment refused.

In its summary judgment proceedings, the bank is seeking repayment of some €2 billion arising mainly from the businessman’s guarantees of loans to companies in the Quinn group.

The bank is also claiming €3 million summary judgment orders against Mr Quinn and his wife Patricia arising from personal borrowings. The proceedings against Mrs Quinn have been adjourned to next month.

Update  Hearing for IBRC’s application to annul Sean Quinn’s UK bankruptcy set for Belfast High Court on 19/20 December.

The bank claims full disclosure was not made when the former billionaire businessman declared himself bankrupt.

A High Court judge was also told more information was required on passports held by Mr Quinn and his tax affairs on both sides of the Irish border.

Mr Justice Deeny said Mr Quinn should be ready to give evidence himself.

, , , , , , , ,

  • Pete Baker

    Update Hearing for IBRC’s application to annul Sean Quinn’s UK bankruptcy set for Belfast High Court on 19/20 December.

    The bank claims full disclosure was not made when the former billionaire businessman declared himself bankrupt.

    A High Court judge was also told more information was required on passports held by Mr Quinn and his tax affairs on both sides of the Irish border.

    Mr Justice Deeny said Mr Quinn should be ready to give evidence himself.

  • IrelandNorth

    Pretty constructive use of partition, dont’ ya think? In an Agreed or Integral Ireland scenario, perhaps we would have to leave Tory island within the United Kingdom of Great Britain (UKGB) so as to creatively process such financial unpleasantries. Buth then, the Isle of Mann is short skip and a jump across the Irish sea (Single European Act?). Can’t help empathising with the Mighty Quinn though, for resisting attempts by capital- pushing Irish banks to recoup their stash. If a leopard never changes its spots, a Celtic Tiger never changes it’s gren stipes.

  • Dumpthedummy

    Given the urgent requirement for Tax revenues to cover the cost of Sean Quinn and the like, you would have to wonder at the Governments treatment of the gambling and betting sector. This sector of the Irish Economy did exceptionally well under the Fianna Fail led Governments during Celtic Tiger boom. This is exemplified by the current market capitalisation of Paddy Power plc which has now reached in excess of euro 2 Billion, making its backers and shareholders exceptionally wealthy. Back in 1999 as betting tax was halved by the then Government this company was
    making an annual profit of euro 5m. Twelve months later with profits rocketing due to the reduced taxes the company went public and its owners went on to untold riches.
    It is difficult to understand the reasoning behind the huge reductions in Betting taxes, firstly from 10% to 5% in 1999, followed by 5% to 2% in 2002 and finally from 2% to 1% in 2006. What is even more difficult to understand is how the Department of Finance, who identified more than twelve years ago that due to weaknesses in the Betting Duty legislation which dates back to the 1930s that operators were avoiding paying any duty at all on their telephone and internet operations, did absolutely nothing about it.
    The first two reductions in betting duty, which effectively reduced the indirect tax burden on a purely domestic retail business by 80%, caused an explosion in the number of betting shops throughout Ireland with all the allied social problems associated with this industry. Like all the excesses associated with this era we are now seeing the effects with shop closures as it becomes apparent that this explosion was not sustainable.
    The final reduction, however, raises more questions than answers. In his first budget in 2005 Brian Cowen announced a further reduction in the indirect taxation of this booming industry. This time a 50% reduction from
    2% to 1%. There seemed no obvious reason for this further generosity to this sector as by this time the 2% duty was being applied to fund the Irish Horse and Greyhound industries and the reduction in the betting duty effectively
    removed the source of funding and pushed it back on to the exchequer where it has remained since. Mr Cowen made no reference to this when he announced the reduced rate of tax and does not appear to have considered the effect
    his decision had. Is it just a coincidence that Mr Cowen’s friend and adviser at the time was also the Chairman of Paddy Power plc, the main beneficiary of this move?
    More strange decisions followed. In 2008, in his budget speech, Brian Lenehan reversed Mr Cowen’s decision and reinstated the 2% rate of betting duty. This was included in the 2009 Finance Act and passed into law.
    However, before it was implemented in May 2009 Mr Lenehan returned to the Dail to amend the legislation to make this decision subject to Ministerial Order, an order he never signed. Mr Lenehan stated that he firstly intended
    to finally correct the existing old legislation to ensure that all betting including internet were brought within the tax before doing so.
    In his budget speech in 2010 Mr Lenehan announced the required measures. However, rather than then sign the ministerial order to restore the rate of tax to 2%, the subsequent Finance Bill actually reduced the rate once again to 1%.
    What happened between the Budget Speech of 2008 and May 2009? What influence, if any, did Mr Feargal O’Rourke of Price Waterhouse Coopers have on this decision? Mr O’Rourke who also happens to be a first cousin of the
    late minister was appointed a tax adviser to Paddy Power plc at this time.
    Prior to this time KPMG were tax advisers to Paddy Power plc. On the Friday afternoon before the announcement of the IMF/EU bailout for Ireland and just prior to the 2010 budget Mr O’Rourke, representing Paddy Power plc and the
    Paddy Power plc CEO Mr Patrick Kennedy were granted an appointment with Taoiseach Brian Cowen. What was the purpose of this meeting? Did the Government decision to retain the 1% tax rate have any impact on the Paddy
    Power plc decision to replace KPMG with PWC as its tax advisers, a very lucrative appointment?
    A further interesting piece of information is that Mr O’Rourke was previously appointed to the Commission on Taxation by Mr Cowen when he was Minister for Finance. The report of this Commission, which analysed all
    other excise duties, strangely seems not to have considered betting duty at all.