Quinn jnr freed pending new High Court hearing

The judge said she thought it was to expire at midnight on Friday but added it was a matter for the prison authorities to release Mr Quinn on expiry of the order. When Mr Grant said the order expired at midnight Thursday, the judge said: “So be it.” Mr Grant said Mr Quinn jnr apologised for being in court in casual clothing as he had expected to be released on Thursday night.

Earlier, Mr Gallagher, for IBRC, said the case was in for review and the matter was urgent, but the bank was prepared to agree to a very short adjournment. This was to allow the Quinns’ new lawyers to prepare for the review hearing and also because the bank believed a full Supreme Court judgment dismissing Mr Quinn jnr’s appeal, to be issued next week, would assist the court as to how the coercive orders should be operated.

While dismissing the appeal last Wednesday, the Supreme Court had also vacated most of the coercive orders against Mr Quinn jnr and had said it would give its full reasons on October 24th.

Mr Gallagher said the bank wanted matters addressed quickly. He said nothing had been done to repay the $500,000 paid out of Quinn Properties Ukraine to general director Larissa Puga (all three Quinns were found in contempt of court over this payment) and a freezing order obtained by the bank on the Puga money had been lifted last week in Ukraine.

The bank had new evidence salvaged from the deliberately damaged server of a computer of a Russian company showing the Quinns were in control of IPG companies well into this year, he said.

The Quinns, counsel continued, had also arranged employment contracts providing for multi-million termination payments for themselves as a way of extracting cash from IPG companies, and the bank did not know if those payments had been made.

Mr Grant said he was instructed the Quinns had signed all documents put in front of them by the bank, except for one about which Mr Quinn was seeking legal advice. The Quinns were willing to sign documents but considered it would be helpful if the bank provided clarification of matters. Mr Quinn had “firmly instructed” he wanted to co-operate and purge his contempt.

The Quinns had also sought to mediate the issues with the bank, Mr Grant added. He sought a four-week adjournment, but the judge granted two weeks only.

Mr Gallagher said the co-operation from the Quinns was piecemeal. Court orders had to be complied with; they were “not for mediation”, he added.

The judge said she would adjourn to November 1st to allow the Quinns’ lawyers time and also because the Supreme Court judgment on Mr Quinn jnr’s appeal would be of assistance to the review.