A Cork couple against whom tax claims of more than £3 million have been filed by the Criminal Assets Bureau had to contact the two organisations representing accountants when they could not get an accountant to act for them, the High Court has been told.
Mr Patrick Anthony McSweeney and his wife, Pauline, of Fairwinds, Waterfall Road, Bishopstown, Cork, have brought proceedings against the CAB, which has filed claims totalling almost £3.2 million plus interest against them.
Last month Mr Justice Shanley agreed to adjourn the hearing of the McSweeneys' claim to July 21st. The judge was told at that hearing that a barrister had only recently been brought into the case, that fees of prior counsel and fees due to Mr McSweeney's former accountant had not been discharged, and that papers in the accountant's possession would not be released until fees were paid.
Mr Justice Shanley varied a previous order freezing monies in the McSweeneys' bank accounts to allow fees to be paid.
In court yesterday Mr John McCoy, for Mr McSweeney (Mrs McSweeney is separately represented), told Mr Justice O'Higgins they were not ready to proceed on July 21st. They had received documents from Mr McSweeney's previous accountant. The files were incomplete and they believed the CAB had other documents. His clients were seeking documents from the bureau.
The former accountant did not know what papers were in the CAB's possession. Last February the accountant had indicated he longer wished to act for the McSweeneys. Another accountant, having "agreed to come on board", then refused.
The McSweeneys' solicitor approached 12 other accountancy firms and then wrote to the two institutes representing the accountants' profession outlining his difficulties. Two accountants were recommended by the Institute of Chartered Accountants and one of the two agreed to act. The Institute of Certified Accountants said it was not aware of any problem.
Mr McCoy said his clients had a full defence to the CAB's claims. They were only meeting the new accountant yesterday. In the circumstances it was putting the McSweeney lawyers "to the pin of their collars" to prepare for this case, which was highly technical and involved more than £3 million. He applied for an adjournment of the hearing to the next law term in October.
Mr Shane Murphy, for CAB, opposed the adjournment application. He said five previous dates had been fixed for the hearing. Specific arrangements had been made on the court's direction to pay out monies to prepare for this trial, and there was ample time to be ready for the July 21st hearing.
Mr Justice O'Higgins said this was a very serious matter in which a large sum of money was involved. He had been told about difficulties getting an accountant to represent the McSweeneys' interest and in the circumstances he would fix the trial for October 12th next. Mr McCoy should impress on his client that there would be no further adjournment.