Quinn 'not entitled to defend action'
A High Court judge has ruled bankrupt businessman Seán Quinn is not entitled to defend a legal action that could ultimately result in judgment for more than €2.3 billion being entered against him in favour of the former Anglo Irish Bank.
Just after Mr Justice Peter Kelly made that ruling today, the bank, now Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC), sought leave to apply for orders appointing receivers over the worldwide assets of the Quinn children and two of their husbands - Stephen Kelly and Niall McPartland - on grounds including they cannot be trusted arising from events including publication last Sunday of a video recording of a meeting in a restaurant in Kiev, Ukraine, in January 2012.
The bank said the meeting was between Peter Darragh Quinn, a nephew of Seán Quinn; Seán Quinn jnr and others, including Ms Larisa Puga. Ms Puga is the alleged recipient of a disputed $500,000 (€397,800) payment allegedly sanctioned by members of the Quinn family from Quinn Properties Ukraine last August just before IBRC took over that company.
That recording, the bank said, appeared to refer to attempts being made by members of the Quinn family in January 2012, "and which continue to be made", to strip assets from a company holding a valuable asset, a shopping centre in Kiev, Ukraine.
The video, the contents of which were published in the Irish Mail on Sunday, showed an exchange regarding large sums of money and also showed Peter Darragh Quinn, a nephew of Mr Quinn, was prepared to lie to the High Court in affidavits, Richard Woodhouse of IBRC said in an affidavit.
He said the video showed Peter Quinn stating he was in breach of a court injunction and, when asked would he lie in his testimony, laughing and responding: "I'd have to lie . . . that wouldn't overly worry me."
The footage also showed a discussion regarding Peter Quinn and Seán Quinn jnr's desire to find a way to move $100,000 in cash from Kiev to an account in a safe place and there was a discussion about the logistics of transporting that sum, in a way that is not detected, Mr Woodhouse said.
There were also references to "six million" and "five million" and a detailed discussion about the need for Peter Quinn to lie about signing contracts or he will go to jail, Mr Woodhouse added.
Brian Murray SC, for the bank, said it wanted to have this material before the court when it is deciding later this month whether to continue assets freezing orders against various Quinn family defendants and for the application to appoint receivers over the assets of the Quinn defendants.
