Flavin feared McCann influence

DCC chief executive Mr Jim Flavin sought to become vice-chairman of Fyffes because of a concern about the influence of the McCann family, the High Court was told yesterday. These concerns surfaced in 1995 when Mr Carl McCann was nominated chairman designate to replace his father, Neil, and when Mr David McCann was appointed chief executive of Fyffes.

Mr Michael Cush SC, for DCC and Mr Flavin, made the suggestion when cross-examining Fyffes chairman Mr Carl McCann in the continuing action by Fyffes alleging "insider dealing" during the sale of the DCC shareholding in Fyffes in February five years ago. The defendants deny the claims.

Yesterday, Mr Cush suggested that Mr McCann's note relating to a suggestion by Mr Flavin that he be appointed vice-chairman of Fyffes was an unfair characterisation of what had happened.

Mr McCann disagreed. He said that if Mr Flavin had suggested that someone other than Mr Flavin should be appointed vice-chairman, that might have been a good idea. While from time to time Mr Flavin may have been concerned about corporate governance, a good deal of his concern was about pursuing DCC's commercial goals.

He said that when Fyffes found itself in the middle of the currency crisis in 1992, the company had been convinced that, to make a success of the business, it must raise new money. Some £50 million (€63.5 million) was raised in the form of preference shares with a view to buying a competitor.

At that time, the McCanns were told by DCC that they should participate in the fundraising and they borrowed £6 million to do so. However, interest rates rose rapidly and they found themselves in a very uncomfortable financial position.

Mr McCann said Mr Flavin had been asked to organise share sales to help put the McCanns on a sound financial footing but had said that was not possible. Eventually the McCanns were forced to sell shares to DCC at a poor price.

Mr McCann said that was business. He said Mr Flavin had also said he wanted to be vice-chairman and wanted other DCC nominees on the Fyffes board. Mr McCann said Mr Flavin had tried to use the McCann's temporary discomfort to procure a much greater degree of control for DCC in Fyffes and it was not exclusively about corporate governance issues, he added.

Mr McCann said Mr Flavin had another time proposed that the McCanns and DCC should set up a company to buy Fyffes in which DCC would be the majority stakeholder. The McCanns did not find that appealing.

Asked was it a feature of his mode of operation to keep file notes, Mr McCann said there was an extensive file relating to Fyffes dealings with DCC over 20 years. He thought it was prudent to make notes on occasion.

Mr Cush suggested the thrust of the memoranda available to the court could be seen as critical of Mr Flavin. Mr McCann said he would note something if it was uncomfortable. There were also some nice letters exchanged between Mr Flavin and the company and vice-versa.