Dunnes petition to be heard

Dunnes says it has to date has paid €18 million for the centre on foot of the 2007 agreement for construction of the development for €37 million and has indicated in correspondence it will pay another €7.5 million and transfer its rights in the centre to Nama if that is accepted as the end of its obligations.

Last September, Holtglen served a notice under Section 214 of the Companies Act on Dunnes. Section 214 provides that where judgment has been obtained against a limited company and the debt is not paid within 21 days of the notice, a petition may be presented seeking to have the company wound up.

In letters to Mr McDonagh this month, Ms Heffernan accused Nama of failing to address any of the "substantial" issues raised by Dunnes concerning the centre and said a report prepared by a planning consultant for Dunnes expressed the view the centre was not compliant with planning permission.

Ms Heffernan raised issues whether the centre complied with planning permission and said she was repeating "yet again" Dunnes invitation to Nama to engage in "meaningful discussions at the highest possible level".

Dunnes employs 18,000 people, contributes very large amounts to the State's coffers via tax payments and continues to be one of the best known and successful Irish companies, she said. It could not be Nama's belief Dunnes is insolvent or that any winding up petition on grounds of insolvency was justified, she wrote.

In relying letters, Mr McDonagh insisted Dunnes must pay the €21.6 million to Holtglen before Nama will engage in any talks about the operation of the Ferrybank development. The fundamental issue was the "pesistent refusal" by Dunnes to pay, he said.

Nama chairman Frank Daly told Ms Heffernan in letters he did not agree the centre was not commercially viable. Dunnes' failure as anchor tenant to fit out and open its anchor store had adversely affected the reputation of the centre and of Holtglen, he said.

Because Dunnes had refused to pay Holtglen despite the arbitrator's award of October 2011 and the court's judgment last March, Nama was left with no option but to take the legal route, Mr Daly told Ms Heffernan. He was disappointed there were no "meaningful proposals" from Dunnes.

In a letter of October 11th, Mr Daly told Ms Heffernan he phoned her personally on June 28th last following the last meeting between Dunnes and Nama on the matter "and you did not return my call".

Mr O'Moore, for Dunnes, said Dunnes was commercially robustly solvent but unwilling to pay the €21.6 million on grounds including Holtglen's insolvency. Dunnes wanted talks with Nama, the interests of Nama and Dunnes were similar, and it made no sense and was a waste of time and money seeking to wind up Dunnes, he added.