Circus family reaches accommodation

An accommodation has been reached between disputing members of the Fossett's Circus family in proceedings taken before the High…

An accommodation has been reached between disputing members of the Fossett's Circus family in proceedings taken before the High Court.

The development was announced yesterday to Mr Justice Kelly after he had earlier urged the parties to reach an agreement outside the court instead of washing the family linen in public.

The judge had remarked that the father of the parties and the founder of Fossett's Circus would be horrified to see, 50 years later, members of his family litigating in the court. There must be a more humane and Christian way of dealing with the matter, Mr Justice Kelly said.

After being told of the agreement, he adjourned to February the proceedings brought by three daughters of Mr Edward Fossett, founder of the famous circus, against the estates of their three deceased brothers.

READ MORE

The action by Ms Mary and Ms Amy Garcia, with addresses at Borneville Village, Birmingham, and Ms Mona Garbola, of The Grange, Lucan, Co Dublin, where Fossett's circus has its headquarters, is against the estates of the late Edward and John Fossett, represented by Mr Barry Bowman, solicitor, and against the estate of the late Mr Robert Fossett, Fossett Brothers Circus Ltd and Fossett Enterprises Ltd.

The daughters had claimed to be entitled to one-sixth of the circus enterprise. Mr Justice Kelly was told the legal proceedings were initiated in 1992 and that numerous attempts to resolve the dispute had failed.

The defence had denied the daughters' claims of an equal partnership in the circus or that they were entitled to one-sixth of the enterprise.

Mr James Dwyer SC, for the estates of the deceased brothers, told the court Fossett's Circus, while extremely famous in Ireland, had never made a great deal of money.

In congratulating the sides yesterday, Mr Justice Kelly said he appreciated the arrangements were not in a finalised form. He pointed out that the alternative to an accommodation was to await a judgment and then a possible appeal to the Supreme Court on top of the fact that the dispute between the parties had already gone on for 11 years.