THE FORMER Anglo Irish Bank may ask the Supreme Court later this week for a speedy hearing of its proposed appeal against a significant ruling permitting bankrupt businessman Seán Quinn’s family to make claims of illegal conduct by the bank in their action aimed at avoiding liability for €2.34 billion loans to companies in the Quinn Group.
The bank may also seek a stay on the family’s proceedings pending the outcome of any Supreme Court appeal.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly said yesterday any stay was a matter for the Supreme Court and he intended to proceed in the interim with hearing various pretrial matters, including the bank’s application for the family to provide security for the estimated €1 million costs of discovery of bank documents for the case. The judge fixed the security for costs and various discovery matters for hearing from April 25th next.
The bank’s separate application for attachment and committal orders against Mr Quinn, his son Seán jnr and his nephew Peter Darragh Quinn over alleged contempt of court orders not to dissipate assets within the family’s international property group will resume before Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne on May 1st.
The contempt proceedings opened in March and ran for eight days before being adjourneds.They are expected to run for another 12 days from May 1st.
In the family’s proceedings against the bank, Anglo – now Irish Bank Resolution Corporation – is seeking to have Patricia Quinn and her five children provide security for the bank’s costs, estimated at more than €1 million, of making “massive” discovery of documents.
In their action, the family say they are entitled to avoid liability for loans of up to €2.34 billion made by Anglo to various Quinn companies on grounds the loans were made for the unlawful purpose of supporting the bank’s share price.
Anglo had asked the Commercial Court to rule, as a preliminary issue, that the family could not advance their claims the loans were unenforceable due to alleged illegality.
Earlier this year, on a significant judgment likely to have implications for other cases against the bank, Mr Justice Peter Charleton said the family were entitled to advance claims the loans were made for “wholesale” market manipulation in breach of Irish and European law.
He also noted there may be a portion of “legitimate debt” involved and there could be a proper apportionment of legitimate and illegitimate debt at the end of the case if the Quinns proved their claims.
