IBRC urges rejection of 'fantastic' evidence

THE EVIDENCE of businessman Seán Quinn and of his son and nephew denying contempt of court orders restraining them putting valuable property assets beyond the reach of Anglo Irish Bank is “fantastic” and “incredible” and should be rejected, the bank has urged the High Court.

However, lawyers for the Quinns submitted the court was being asked to jail the three on material falling well below the standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) for contempt, and denied the bank’s claim that Seán Quinn snr, as “patriarch, master and commander” of the family, authorised and directed an “elaborate, deliberate and systemic” plan to frustrate claims by the bank to such assets.

Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne indicated yesterday she will first decide whether or not Mr Quinn, his son Seán and nephew Peter Darragh Quinn are in contempt before hearing arguments on the nature of what orders should be made if contempt is found.

She told Bill Shipsey SC, for the Quinns, she did not disagree at all with legal submissions to the effect that the usual purpose of contempt proceedings is to remedy any wrongs done. When the cat’s out of the bag, it’s hard to put it back in, she indicated.

All three respondents are excused from attending court today because of the wedding of Seán Quinn jnr.

The hearing of the application by Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (IBRC) – formerly Anglo – for orders for attachment and, if necessary, committal of the three is expected to conclude later today, with judgment reserved.

All three have denied contempt of court orders of June and July 2011 restraining any steps to place assets in the Quinn international property group beyond the bank’s reach. All three say such steps were taken prior to the orders but not afterwards.

The High Court made the restraint orders in proceedings in which the bank claimed the family was trying to put properties in the international property group, said to have assets valued up to €500 million, beyond its reach.

In separate proceedings, the family claim they are not liable for loans of some €2.34 billion made by Anglo to Quinn companies because those loans were unlawfully made to prop up the bank’s share price.

Yesterday, in closing submissions for IBRC, Shane Murphy SC argued the bank had proven contempt beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence showed a plan was authorised by Seán Quinn snr to put assets beyond the reach of the bank. The plan was developed by his nephew Peter from about autumn 2010 on foot of legal advice in various jurisdictions, and Seán Quinn jnr was aware of the plan, he said. The evidence also showed steps in furtherance of the plan were carried out after the court orders, he added.

Explanations provided by the Quinns for the transfer of valuable assets in the group for no consideration, or for nominal consideration, to apparently unconnected entities, including an unemployed Ukrainian, were “implausible” and “unbelievable”.

Mr Shipsey, for the Quinns, said the bank had complained about the Quinns “drip-feeding” information to it and not assisting its efforts to recover when there was no obligation on the Quinns to assist the bank.