MC v D: round one
Full report here from Mary Carolan about yesterday’s opening bout in the MCD Concerts case. This involves an action taken by Eamonn McCann (the MC in MCD) against Denis Desmond (the D in MCD) over a share of the profits …
Full report here from Mary Carolan about yesterday’s opening bout in the MCD Concerts case. This involves an action taken by Eamonn McCann (the MC in MCD) against Denis Desmond (the D in MCD) over a share of the profits he claims he is owed from various outdoor events promoted by the pair.
Per report, “it was agreed in June 2006 Mr Desmond would buy Mr McCann’s share of the partnership in relation to the promotion and operation of outdoor concerts in the Republic for 4.66 times the average net profits of the partnership for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005, it is alleged.”
McCann “claims he is owed some €3.8 million as his profit share, but that Mr Desmond claimed that figure should be €104,680.”
However, “it is alleged Mr Desmond later denied the existence of a partnership, was reluctant to disclose the books and accounts and provided limited information relating to accounts.”
McCann claims “it became clear Mr Desmond had failed to keep proper books and records for the partnership and that partnership funds had become intermingled with funds and accounts of other companies of Mr Desmond’s” such as MCD Productions and Gaiety Investments.
Forensic accountants Grant Thornton had been engaged to examine the books and McCann claims their examination “indicated no evidence of separate books and records maintained for the partnership. He claimed the firm found that payments which should have been recorded as partnership monies were recorded in the books of other companies of Mr Desmond’s.
“As late as September last, Grant Thornton received new information from MCD about settlement statements for events in Lansdowne Road between 2002 and 2006, it is claimed. Mr McCann said the firm was given selected settlement statements with artists and certain settlement statements for Oliver Barry, event co-organiser, but it had not been possible to reconcile the two sets of statements.”
(Comments turned off as this case is currently before the courts)