Ivor Fitzpatrick’s firm in alleged negligence dust up

There is a dispute between the parties over who should carry the can, but the stake was sold without McGivern being released from the guarantees

Four Courts: where the fallout from the Celtic Tiger glory days is still being played out

Four Courts: where the fallout from the Celtic Tiger glory days is still being played out

 

Eight years on, the fallout from the glory days still envelops the Four Courts, where developers, banks and solicitors are taking daily chunks out of each other over failed boomtime deals. It’s as vicious as cage fighting, but with wigs and cloaks and possibly Pimms afterwards.

I hear one such spat, a negligence case between the blue-blooded firm of solicitors run by Ivor Fitzpatrick, the brief-turned-property investor, and one of its former clients could soon be coming to the boil, with a court date possible for later this year. A juicy dust up it is, too, by the sounds of it.

The partners of Ivor Fitzpatrick, including the man himself, are being sued by Hugh McGivern, an insurance broker who was formerly a business partner of the developer, “Posh” Paddy Kelly. McGivern is being represented in the fight against his old firm by Noel Smyth, another of our learned friends who is better known for his property deals.

McGivern was a partner with Kelly in the Mango chain of fashion outlets, but agreed a sale of his shares to the developer in 2006. McGivern had guaranteed leases alongside his former partner, and claims he sought to be released from those guarantees in the negotiations, during which he was represented by Fitzpatrick’s firm.

There is a dispute between the parties over who should carry the can, but the stake was sold without McGivern being released from the guarantees.

Roll on 2009 and the economy came crashing down, and with it Kelly’s ability to pay his bills. Landlords started hounding McGivern on the back of his guarantees.

McGivern, who would not comment, blames Ivor Fitzpatrick solicitors for the mess. The firm, which did not comment either, is understood to firmly reject his allegations of negligence. It’ll soon be time to get it on. Queensbury rules?

The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
GO BACK
Error Image
The account details entered are not currently associated with an Irish Times subscription. Please subscribe to sign in to comment.
Comment Sign In

Forgot password?
The Irish Times Logo
Thank you
You should receive instructions for resetting your password. When you have reset your password, you can Sign In.
The Irish Times Logo
Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.
Screen Name Selection

Hello

Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.

The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
Forgot Password
Please enter your email address so we can send you a link to reset your password.

Sign In

Your Comments
We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.