Você está na página 1de 735

Dennis O Brien & The Clinton Foundation

Sep 19, 2016


Find Truthful Iish on Facebook, click here
https://www.facebook.com/truthful.irish/
US Republican Party strategist Karl Rove discusses Denis
OBrien, Digicel and Haiti on Bill OReillys show on Fox News
during an item on Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation..
Any content used is used under The Fair Use Acts.

https://www.youtube
.com/watch?
v=ydOXJdGb8sg&fe
ature=youtu.be
Denis O'Brien lashes out at the Moriarty
Tribunal
Jul 27, 2009
Irish Businessman Denis O'Brien lashed out at the Moriarty
Tribunal in a series of interviews he gave to Irish Sunday
newspapers on Sunday July 26th 2009. The Moriarty Tribunal is
investigating the granting of Ireland's second mobile phone
licence in 1996 to Mr O'Brien's company, ESAT digifone. Irish
broadcaster and journalist, Karen Coleman discussed Denis
O'Brien's press interviews on Moriarty with her guests on her
show, The Wide Angle on Newstalk106-108 on Sunday 26th
July '09.

https://www.youtub
e.com/watch?
v=zt3yAJv5_5k
Joe Higgins TD questions Enda Kenny on
the Moriarty Report during Leaders'
Questions (29-03-11)
Mar 30, 2011
Joe Higgins TD questions Enda Kenny on the Moriarty Report
and the connections between Fine Gael, Michael Lowry and
Denis O'Brien during Leaders' Questions.

https://www.youtub
e.com/watch?
v=dYout8OJj0s
Taoiseach rules out new Moriarty Probe
into Michael Lowry
Feb 26, 2013

https://www.youtub
e.com/watch?
v=r_GkySIQgGg
Michael Lowry/Kevin Phelan phonecall
tape lowry tapes

Apr 14, 2013


Michael Lowry and Kevin Phelan discuss Vineacre, the Glebe
Trust and Moriarty Tribunal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNzuM4Bxs_o

Oliver Callan on the Healy Raes, Michael


Lowry and Denis O'Brien
Apr 22, 2016
Oliver sails close to the wind here on the Late Late Show. Have
a look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRneCyXka4s

Oliver Callan - Callan Kicks The General


Election | The Late Late Show | RT One
Feb 19, 2016
Watch The Late Late Show live and on-demand from anywhere
in the world at http://www.rte.ie/player
The Late Late Show | Fridays | RT One, 9:35pm Irish Time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdwH2SaPiKM

They say Freudian slips are where the truth may lie...

Denis O'Brien's Freudian slip on RT Six


One
May 29, 2015
Remember the time Denis nearly admitted to paying Michael
Lowry when interviewed by Bryan Dobson?
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0322/2989...
http://www.moriarty-tribunal.ie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=RIIzmK0ayoI&feature=youtu.be

Denis OBrien speaks on Digicels IPO |


CEEN News | Nov 4, 2015
Nov 9, 2015
Watch CEEN News live weeknights at 8/7c on CEEN TV...
Caribbean Entertainment Everyday Network, your preferred
eye to the Caribbean.
To Subscribe to CEEN TV:
Ontario, Canada | Bell Fibe TV | channel 661 | $7 monthly | Tel:
1-866-797-8686
Ontario, Canada | Rogers Digital TV | channel 684 | $7 monthly
| Tel: 1-855-381-7834
US New York Tri-State | CableVision Optimum | channel 1103 |
$4.95 monthly | Tel: 1-888-276-5255
Contact Us:
Website: ceen.tv
Facebook: www.facebook.com/CEENTV
Twitter: @CEEN_TV
Instagram: @CEENTV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=aBPjnRGu3uk
Global Irish Economic Forum: Denis
O'Brien
Oct 7, 2011
For more go to http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1007/glob...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=Yw6J063awQo

Discussing Haitis Economy, Denis


OBrien Calls 1960 Ireland An Economic
Wasteland"
Sep 28, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXfoTBFoA-E

Enda Kenny and Joan Burton on Budget


2016 | The Late Late Show | RT One
Oct 16, 2015
Oliver Callan's cast of characters gives his unique take on this
year's Budget 2016.
Watch The Late Late Show live and on-demand from anywhere
in the world at http://www.rte.ie/player
The Late Late Show | Fridays | RT One, 9:35pm Irish Time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTpCW2_pFtk

Infamous IPhone Joan Burton remark


Nov 8, 2014
Joan Burton insinuates that ordinary people shouldnt be able to
afford smartphones and tablets. She is also highly annoyed
that people can now record illegal state activity and be called
on it. There have been numerous videos of state terrorism
through the police force at peaceful protests all around Dublin
and the country.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9sQe9ZVDys

2014/11 GARDA BRUTALITY AND NO


RIGHT TO PEACEFUL PROTEST
Nov 18, 2014
Disgraceful Garda acts.
WARNING FROM GARDA INSIDER:
"Gardai have been ordered in a directive from government
buildings and Fine Gael HQ to remove water protesters and use
whatever methods necessary. They also ordered to discredit
the protests by any means and to confiscate any recording
equipement used by such protesters."
Following the disgraceful attack with untruths spread by the

Denis O`Brien media empire about ordinary citizens peacefully


protesting against water meter installation in North Dublin.
Audrey Clancy (Dublin says no) responds to this attempt by the
Government and O`Briens Media to blackened the name of
protesters who have Successfully put this Government on the
ropes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN6c2AZ7ES8

Right To Water - Garda


Brutality/Unnecessary Force - Irish Water
Protest in Dublin, Ireland
Nov 16, 2014
Scenes from todays Anti-Irish Water protest against Taoiseach
Enda Kenny which involved three uniformed Garda pulling a
woman from the bonnet of a car and throwing her to the
ground with blatant disregard for her safety. The video was
originally posted by Edenmore Says No but as I was so affected
by the hurt caused I chose to download the video and remind
those involved on theri Mandate to Irish people. I recognise the
fact that Gardai aren't the real enemy but they are acting on
orders from those in power. Representing that power in an
abusive and forceful way is not in agreement with their statute
of operations. This poor girl has a right to protest, the Garda
have an obligation to protect that right as well as protect her
general safety, the abuse which took place in this video
completely disregarded this womans right to both protest and
her have her well being intact. Ad at beginning is autogenerated, please ignore.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v33cxzPcps

Clarehall Garda decide to charge at


peaceful protesters
Clarehall Garda decide to charge at
peaceful protesters
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16FAs_LbFaE

Joan Burton hit by water balloon in


Jobstown Tallaght
Nov 15, 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzKz69VkYJE

GOOD COP / BAD COP?


Jul 28, 2016
This first cop knows the law and admits he is not allowed to
park (unless there's an emergency) on double yellow lines. The
second cop (who assaults a woman for no reason and treats
her in a manner that is the antithesis of the oath he took as a
garda) is scarily out of control. This is Store Street, where,
allegedly, corruption is as common as cups of tea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98zVHYCoSvQ

Trumps Press
Release re Denis O
Brien in full
SEPTEMBER 29, 2016

To date, no Irish media reprinted any of the specific


content within Donald Trumps press release about
Denis O Briens links to the Clinton Foundation,
and Clinton family.
Whats even more striking, no media outlet even
offers a hyperlink in its own self censoring coverage
to the actual press release itself.

The press release is in full below. As we can see,


none of it is original content, or even amounts to
any sort of political analysis. Its simply copy paste
of pieces, mostly uncontested facts already written
online. Much of it from within Ireland.
Irish media outlets might consider their choice not to
link or include any specifics outlined within ( eg O
Briens donating to the Clinton Foundation whilst
getting contracts from the US state department for
mobile phone contract in Haiti) as pragmatic.
That Im afraid is internalised logic, which any
observer can see is based on internalising a fear of
O Briens power and justifying something politica as
a business decision. And thats a much bigger
news than any copy paste job Trumps team fires
out.

Update: 12.49. Hattip to Marcus OCuilleanin for


this link
Upon legal advice, RT will not be repeating the
exact words used in the statement 1:27mins
Heres the presser in full.
Image designed and courtesy of Eamonn Crudden
SEPTEMBER 28, 2016

FOLLOW THE MONEY:


DENIS OBRIEN
ANOTHER CORRUPT
CLINTON FRIEND

DENIS OBRIEN IS A BILLIONAIRE CELL


PHONE TYCOON WITH CLOSE TIES TO THE
CLINTONS AND ALSO ONE OF THE MOST
REVILED FIGURES IN IRELAND
Denis OBrien Is A Cell Phone Tycoon Who
Owns Digicel, A Mobile Phone Network
Provider That Operates In Central America, The
Caribbean, And The Pacific Islands. Cell phone
tycoon Denis OBrien runs and owns 94% of
Digicel, a mobile phone network provider that
operates in Central America, the Caribbean, and

the Pacific Islands. The company was supposed to


hold its initial public offering on the New York Stock
Exchange in 2015 but pulled it in October due to
volatility in the markets. In recent years, OBrien
has been on a deal-making binge in Ireland,
snapping up distressed assets on the cheap and
turning them around. (#219 Denis OBrien,
Forbes, Accessed 4/26/16)
NOTE: As Of April 26, 2016, OBrien Is Worth
$6.1 Billion USD. (#219 Denis OBrien, Forbes,
Accessed 4/26/16)
OBrien Also Founded The Esat Telecom Group
PLC And Is The Chair Of The Clinton Global
Initiative Haiti Action Network. OBrien also
founded the Esat Telecom Group plc. He is a
Director on the US Board of Concern Worldwide, a
member of the UN Broadband Commission for
Digital Development, and chair of the Clinton Global
Initiative Haiti Action Network. In addition, he is
Chairman and Co-Founder of Frontline, the
International Foundation for the Protection of
Human Rights Defenders. In 2000, he established
The Iris OBrien Foundation to identify and assist
projects in Ireland and internationally which aim to
alleviate disadvantaged communities. (Clinton
Foundation Website, Accessed 4/26/16)
OBrien Is One Of The Most Reviled Figures In

Ireland Over Revelations About His Business


Affairs. OBrien is Irelands leading philanthropist
but now also one of the most reviled figures there. It
is an extraordinary paradox that surrounds his
business success how he made his fortune and
now how he is handling revelations about his
banking and business affairs. For a man described
by Clinton as changing the world more than anyone
else for the betterment of the poor recent negative
press provides a dizzying contrast. (James OShea,
Clintons Close Friend Denis OBrien Battles
Massive Criticism In Ireland, Irish Central, 6/8/15)
OBrien Is A Major Clinton Foundation
Supporter And Bill Clintons Friend

(Clinton Foundation Website, Accessed 4/26/16)


Denis J. OBrien And Digicel Cumulatively
Donated $10,000,001 To $25,000,000 To The
Clinton Foundation. (Contributor And Grantor
Information, Clinton Foundation Website, Accessed
4/26/16)
Bill Clinton And OBrien Developed A Close

Working Relationship During Their Work


Together In Haiti. Mr Clinton and Mr. OBrien
formed a close working relationship in Haiti where
the former acted as UN special envoy, and where
Digicel has become the countrys largest foreign
investor ever pumping $600 million (443 million)
into an economy devastated by the 2010
earthquake.(Joe Humphreys, Bill Clinton Visit
Cements Close Working Relationship With Denis
OBrien, The Irish Times, 10/10/13)
Chelsea Clinton Thanked OBrien For His
Tireless Leadership In Haiti. CHELSEA
CLINTON: And again, I want to thank Denis
OBrien for his tireless leadership, as well as also
getting Ruth Messenger a chair proving indeed
that chivalry is alive and well. Without his sort of
dogged commitment, I dont think we would have
had the success rate that he is so rightly proud of
and that we are so rightly grateful to be part of. So, I
want to welcome Adam to the stage to help lead the
conversation, but I also would ask all of you to
please give Denis who is far too humble a round of
applause. (Chelsea Clinton, Remarks At The 2015
Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting, New York,
NY, 9/27/15)
In 2011 OBrien Flew Bill Clinton To Ireland On
His Private Jet So That Clinton Could Speak At

The Global Irish Economic Forum. In 2011, Mr


Clinton flew to Ireland on Mr OBriens private jet to
attend the Global Irish Economic Forum in Dublin
Castle, which was hosted by Taoiseach Enda
Kenny. (Joe Humphreys, Bill Clinton Visit Cements
Close Working Relationship With Denis OBrien,
The Irish Times, 10/10/13)
On The Same Trip, OBrien Picked Up The
Restaurant Tab For His Mate Clinton And 23
Others. He has an honorary doctorate from UCD
and is a mate of former US President, Bill Clinton.
Indeed, he flew him to the recent Dublin Castle
beano in his jet, and later paid the tab for a latenighter in the Unicorn restaurant with Clinton, the
strangely ever-present Samus Heaney and 22
others. (Denis OBrien: A Complicated Career And
Dubious Ethics, Village, 12/14/11)
President Clinton Named Denis OBrien As A
Clinton Global Citizen In 2012. The Clinton
Global Citizen Awards recognizes individuals from
various sectors who demonstrate visionary
leadership in addressing global challenges. Carlos
Slim Hel, founder of Fundacin Carlos Slim; Luis
A. Moreno, president of Inter-American
Development Bank; Denis OBrien, chairman and
founder of Digicel Group; Pepe Julian Onziema,
programme director and advocacy officer of Sexual

Minorities Uganda (SMUG); The Right Reverend


Christopher Senyonjo, executive director of St.
Pauls Reconciliation and Equality Centre; and Katie
Stagliano, founder and chief executive gardener of
Katies Krops, will accept awards this year.( Press
Release, President Clinton to Honor Six Recipients
at the Sixth Annual Clinton Global Citizen Awards,
The Clinton Foundation, 9/24/12)
In 2012, Clinton Rated OBriens Ideas To Make
Cash Transactions Available For The Poor
Through Cell Phones As The Number One Idea
Changing The World. Former president Bill
Clinton wrote in a September 2012 Time Magazine
cover story that Irish businessman Denis OBriens
move to make cash transactions available for the
poorest in the world via cell phones was the number
one idea in changing the world. The Time cover
story featuring Clinton holding a globe is entitled 5
Ideas that are changing the World and OBriens
idea was rated tops. (James OShea, Clintons
Close Friend Denis OBrien Battles Massive
Criticism In Ireland, Irish Central, 6/8/15)
OBrien, Described As A Friend, Was The Main
Facilitator And Benefactor For Clintons Speech
At A 2013 Gathering For The One Percent
Difference Campaign. Bill Clintons third speaking
engagement in Ireland in as many years was

facilitated largely by his friend and fellow


philanthropist Denis OBrien. The billionaire
chairman of the Digicel telecoms group helped to
cover the cost of the visit along with a number of
other private donors. Opening his speech, Mr.
Clinton thanked Mr OBrien personally for the
invitation. (Joe Humphreys, Bill Clinton Visit
Cements Close Working Relationship With Denis
OBrien, The Irish Times, 10/10/13)
OBrien Is A Fan Of Hillary Clintons And
Hosted A 2012 Dinner For Her While She Was
Secretary Of State
According To A 2014 Interview, OBrien Is A
Fan Of Hillary Clintons. ODOWD: Speaking of
politicians, you are a big fan of Hillary Clinton. Do
you think she is going to run for the White House in
2016? OBRIEN: Id say she is going to see what
the lay of the land is, like any clever politician, to
see whos there on the Democratic side. I think a
year out from the primaries last time, not a lot of
people had heard of Obama and never saw him as
a serious candidate, so obviously she is waiting to
see whos there. And yes, I am a fan. (Niall
ODowd, Exclusive: Denis OBrien On Tony
OReilly, Hillary, Ireland, And Making A Difference,
Irish Central, 9/27/14)
In 2012, OBrien Hosted A Dinner For Hillary

Clinton During Her Visit To Dublin. There was


lots of reminiscing the day before in Dublin too
when about 12 of us old-time Hillary supporters sat
with her in a Dublin restaurant at a dinner hosted by
businessman Denis OBrien. In the small private
dinner setting just off Stephens Green in Dublin she
made clear that the fire still burns. The affection for
Ireland and the desire to serve again was very clear
that night. (Niall ODowd, Hillary Clinton Book
Recalls Role In Irish Peace Process, Irish Central,
6/11/14)
OBriens Company Received Funds Overseen
By A Top Clinton Aide To Develop Mobile
Services In Post-Earthquake Haiti
In 2011, OBriens Company Digicel Was
Awarded a $2.5 Million Award From Funds
Overseen By A Top Clinton Aide To Develop
Mobile Services In Haiti. Irish billionaire Denis
OBrien, who heads a mobile-phone network
provider called Digicel, won a $2.5 million award in
2011 from a program run by the State Departments
U.S. Agency for International Development to offer
mobile money services in post-earthquake Haiti.
The firm won subsequent awards. Funds for the
awards were provided by the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation, while USAID administered the program,
with a top Clinton aide directly overseeing

earthquake aid. (James V. Grimaldi, Rebecca


Ballhaus, And Peter Nicholas, Gifts To Hillary
Clintons Family Charity Are Scrutinized In Wake Of
Book, The Wall Street Journal, 4/22/15)
OBRIEN FACES CONTINUED INVESTIGATIONS
INTO HIS QUID PRO QUO DEALINGS WITH
IRISH POLITICIANS
An Irish Tribunal Determined That OBrien
Received Significant Aid From Michael Lowry,
The Irish Communications Minister, In
Obtaining A Valuable Telecom License
The Irish Moriarty Tribunal Concluded Beyond
Doubt That OBrien Had Received Substantial
Help In Obtaining A Lucrative Mobile License
From Then Communications Minister Michael
Lowry. The Moriarty tribunals second and final
report has found that Michael Lowry assisted Denis
OBrien in his bid to secure a mobile phone contract
for Esat Digifone. It concluded it is beyond doubt
that then minister for transport, energy and
communications Mr Lowry gave substantive
information to Denis OBrien, of significant value
and assistance to him in securing the [mobile]
licence. It said Mr Lowry and Mr OBrien had at
least two meetings during the bid process at which
the former minister imparted substantive
information to Mr OBrien of significant value and

assistance to him in securing the licence.


(Moriarty Says Lowry Helped OBrien Win Mobile
Licence, The Irish Times, 3/22/11)
OBrien Transferred A Substantial Amount Of
Money To Lowry And His Party Around The
Time His Firm Was Seeking A Mobile License
OBrien Gave Lowrys Political Party A 50,000
Donation The Year The Contract Was Granted.
The minister was then a member of the Fine Gael
party, which was also offered a donation amounting
to 50,000 (43,400) from OBrien in the year the
contract was granted. The-then prime minister, John
Bruton, later sent the money back. (Henry
MacDonald, Former Irish Minister Michael Lowry
Accused Of Collusion Over Telecoms Bid, The
Guardian, 3/22/11)
The Moriarty Tribunal Found That The Payment
Was Made On Behalf Of Esat Digifone At The
Instigation And Promotion Of Denis OBrien. It
said this payment was made in a manner which,
having regard to its false and misleading
documentation, the initial payment to an offshore
Jersey account, and the eventual delays and
misrepresented form of transmission to Fine Gael,
was secretive, utterly lacking in transparency and
designed to conceal the fact of such payment by or
on behalf of the donors. The tribunal has found that

the payment, although not one ever intended for Mr


Lowry personally, was nonetheless one that
technically falls within its terms of reference and
was a payment to Fine Gael, on behalf of Esat
Digifone at the instigation and promotion of Denis
OBrien. (Moriarty Says Lowry Helped OBrien Win
Mobile Licence, The Irish Times, 3/22/11)
The Moriarty Tribunal Concluded That OBrien
Transferred 150,000 To Lowry In Several Secret
Transactions. Clandestine money transactions
took place between OBrien and Lowry in return for
the ministers support, according to Mr. Justice
Moriarty, the tribunals chairman. The report said
that at one stage, while Lowry was communications
minister, he received a sum amounting to 150,000
from OBrien. (Henry MacDonald, Former Irish
Minister Michael Lowry Accused Of Collusion Over
Telecoms Bid, The Guardian, 3/22/11)
Over The Course Of Four Years, OBrien Would
Provide An Additional 720,000 In Payments
And Loan Support To Lowry. Within four years of
this first encounter, OBrien had, the tribunal tells us,
donated almost IR1m in clandestine
circumstances to Lowry through loan support and
payments. These came in three separate
instalments; the first happened to occur less than
seven weeks after the mobile phone licence had

been granted. It included IR147,000, Stg300,000


and a benefit equivalent to a payment, in the form
of loan support, of Stg420,000.(Elaine Byrne,So
Whos Afraid Of Denis OBrien? Enda Kenny Is,
Sunday Independent, 10/16/11)
OBrien Tried To Spoof A Company Executive
Into Releasing Funds For A Payment To Lowry
That OBrien Wanted To Make. Some time
afterwards Mr. OBrien told Esat executive Barry
Moloney that hed tried to make a payment to Mr.
Lowry but the payment had got stuck with an
intermediary. Mr. OBrien later told his Esat
colleagues that this was a spoof designed to get Mr.
Moloney to release some funds Mr. OBrien wanted
released. (Colm Keena, Next Moriarty Report
Focus On OBrien, Lowry, The Irish Times, 1/8/07)
OBriens Company At The Time Was Seeking A
Mobile Phone License, Which Was Later Sold
Off To British Telecom. At the time OBriens Esat
Digifone conglomerate was trying to gain a mobile
phone licence which had been put out to public
tender in 1995. OBrien later sold that licence to
British Telecom, netting his business hundreds of
millions of euros. (Henry MacDonald, Former Irish
Minister Michael Lowry Accused Of Collusion Over
Telecoms Bid, The Guardian, 3/22/11)
The Moriarty Tribunal Described OBriens

Transactions Were Demonstrably Referable To


The Acts And Conduct Of Mr. Lowry. The final
Moriarty tribunal report was published in March
2011. It found Mr Lowry secured the winning of the
States second mobile phone licence competition for
Mr OBriens consortium, Esat Digifone. It also
found Mr OBrien made payments to, and supported
a loan to, Mr Lowry and that the transactions were
demonstrably referable to the acts and conduct of
Mr Lowry. The two men have said the tribunal was
wrong in its findings. (Colm Keena, Cab Seeks To
Question Denis OBrien On Tribunal Findings, The
Irish Times, 1/9/16)
The Irish Criminal Assets Bureau Continues To
Investigate OBrien After Gathering Further
Material Regarding His Telecom Bid
The Irish Criminal Assets Bureau Will Be
Interviewing OBrien Over The Moriarty
Tribunals Findings After Gathering Further
Material About The Matter. The Criminal Assets
Bureau will look to interview businessman Denis
OBrien about the findings of the Moriarty tribunal
report after it has gathered further material,
according to a source with knowledge of the matter.
While a number of relevant witnesses have already
been interviewed, an interview with Mr OBrien has
yet to take place but will be sought, according to the

source. (Colm Keena, Cab Seeks To Question


Denis OBrien On Tribunal Findings, The Irish
Times, 1/9/16)
NOTE: The Criminal Assets Bureau Is The
Agency That Identifies Money Gained Through
Serious Crime. Denis OBrien, Irelands largest
media owner, is being investigated by the countrys
Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB), the agency that
identifies money gained through serious crime.
(Roy Greenslade, Denis OBrien Under
Investigation By Irelands Criminal Assets Bureau,
The Guardian, 1/11/16)
OBRIENS PURCHASE OF A DEBT-RIDDLED
COMPANY COST IRISH TAXPAYERS 110
MILLION
In 2012, OBrien Purchased A Company Whose
Debt, Caused By His Endless Buying And
Selling Of Property Was Partially Offset By
Irish State Funds. In 2012 OBrien acquired for
45.4 million, Siteserv, a construction company that
was buying up numerous other property companies
during Irelands short lived economic boom. At the
time of purchase, OBrien owed IBRC, the state
owned-bank, hundreds of millions of euros.
Siteserv, like many companies who went bankrupt
during this financial apocalypse in Ireland, pace
2008, were previously allowed to run riot on a never

ending spending spree, supported by Anglo Irish


Bank. By purchasing Siteserv, another company
riddled with Anglo Irish Bank-fuelled debt, OBrien
was effectively buying from the state an asset
riddled with debtmuch of which he helped create
through his endless buying and selling of property.
(J.P. OMalley, Why Is The Irish Government
Scared of Billionaire Denis OBrien?, The Daily
Beast, 6/12/15)
The Sale Of The Company To OBrien
Therefore Cost The Irish Taxpayer 110 Million.
The sale of Siteserv to OBrien also had another
favorable condition: IBRC agreed to write off over
100million of Siteservs debt. And shareholders
received 5million from the sale. The sale of the
company to OBrien therefore cost the Irish taxpayer
110 million. (J.P. OMalley, Why Is The Irish
Government Scared of Billionaire Denis OBrien?,
The Daily Beast, 6/12/15)
OBRIEN ATTEMPTS TO SILENCE POLITICIANS
AND JOURNALISTS WHO CRITICIZE HIM
OBrien Has Previously Injuncted Or Initiated
Defamation Proceedings 24 Times Against 42
Media Outlets. (J.P. OMalley, Why Is The Irish
Government Scared of Billionaire Denis OBrien?,
The Daily Beast, 6/12/15)
In 2016, OBrien Sued The Irish Revenue

Commissioners And Claimed They Breached


His Privacy By Providing Details Of His Tax
Liability To The Media. Businessman Denis
OBrien is suing the Revenue Commissioners
claiming they breached his privacy by providing
details of his tax affairs to the media. He claims the
alleged disclosure arose from a document Revenue
provided to certain news organisations during a
case arising out of his tax liability for 1999/2000
relating to the sale of his shares in Esat Telecom to
BT Hawthorn Ltd. Revenue deny his claims and say
almost all the information came from a public High
Court hearing. (Denis Obrien Sues Revenue For
Breach Of Privacy, The Irish Times, 3/16/16)
In 2015, OBrien Succeeded In Getting An
Injunction Against Media Outlets Reporting On
A Speech In The Irish Parliament That Criticized
His Banking Arrangements. As I wrote in May
this year, most of Irelands media were silenced
after OBrien obtained a Dublin high court injunction
against the countrys main broadcaster, RT, in
order to prevent it reporting a parliamentary speech.
That injunction was eventually clarified, which
allowed the speech to be reported. (Roy
Greenside, Why Does Irish Media Mogul Denis
OBrien Launch So Many Legal Actions?, The
Guardian, 10/29/15)

OBrien Sued The Parliamentary Committee


That Cleared The MP Who Criticized Him For His
Banking Arrangements. The speech that upset
OBrien was made by Catherine Murphy TD, who
raised questions over his banking arrangements.
When she was cleared of having abused her
parliamentary privilege by a Dil committee, OBrien
then started legal action against the committee.
(Roy Greenside, Why Does Irish Media Mogul
Denis OBrien Launch So Many Legal Actions?,
The Guardian, 10/29/15)
The Irish Times: OBriens Case Is Ill-Judged
And Dangerous, A Regrettable Move By A
Wealthy Serial Litigator. That is also the clear
purpose of the writers of the Constitution. Any other
interpretation, however tempting to judges
instinctively distrustful of the imperfection of political
decision-making, will set the judiciary on a course of
confrontation with parliament that it will rue,
irrespective of the merits of Mr OBriens cause. His
case is ill-judged and dangerous, a regrettable
move by a wealthy serial litigator. He should
withdraw it. (Editorial, In Defence Of Privilege,
The Irish Times, 8/5/15)
OBriens Injunction Was Branded As A

Constitutional Crisis. But numerous journalists


and politicians branded this particular injunction as
a constitutional crisis. The Irish Constitution allows
for all statements that are made in its national
parliament to be protected by parliamentary
privilege. By gagging his critics, OBrien was
potentially creating a precedent in Ireland where a
private individual was dictating what could and
could not be reported from the national parliament
to the press. (J.P. OMalley, Why Is The Irish
Government Scared of Billionaire Denis OBrien?,
The Daily Beast, 6/12/15)
In August, He Threatened To Sue A Satirical
Website, Waterford Whispers, For Running A
Spoof Item About OBrien. The Post Was Duly
Taken Down. (Roy Greenside, Why Does Irish
Media Mogul Denis OBrien Launch So Many Legal
Actions?, The Guardian, 10/29/15)
In 2013, OBrien Won A Defamation Claim
Against A Paper That Covered His Earthquake
Relief Efforts. In February 2013, he won 150,000
damages in a successful defamation claim against
the Irish Daily Mail over an article published in 2010
about OBriens Haiti earthquake relief efforts. The
Mails solicitor said after the verdict that it was a sad
day for freedom of expression in Ireland. (Roy

Greenside, Why Does Irish Media Mogul Denis


OBrien Launch So Many Legal Actions?, The
Guardian, 10/29/15)
In 2012, Transparency International Voiced
Concerns About OBriens Legal Actions
Against Journalists. In November 2012, an
organisation called Transparency International
Ireland voiced concerns to the United Nations over
the number of OBriens legal actions. It cited figures
compiled by the National Union of Journalists that
listed actions, or threats of actions, against 17
journalists and media groups by OBrien since
1998. Among the most high profile were those
against some of Irelands best-known
commentators, such as Vincent Browne, Sam
Smyth and Elaine Byrne. TI Irelands chief executive
John Devitt said at the time: The use of litigation
and legal threats denies journalists and editors the
human right to freely report and comment on
matters of public importance. Journalists also have
a duty to report or comment on issues in the public
interest even if they have a negative impact on Mr
OBriens reputation. (Roy Greenside, Why Does
Irish Media Mogul Denis OBrien Launch So Many
Legal Actions?, The Guardian, 10/29/15)

Denis O Brien ; Greed, Oil &

Topaz
.entry-header
i) Denis O Brien Siteserv 06-06-14 Rent-a Fence to Irish Water
t.b.c
ii) Denis O Brien 10-06-14 Topaz-Statoil-Shell-Dutch Shell t.b.c
http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1044&context=aaschssldis
If N.A.M.A is unknowable , unseen , illogical, unaccountable and if
it is beyond intelligence TOPAZ-DUTCH SHELL-SHELL-STATOILION EQUITY-KPMG-BOI- AIB know no boundaries or just care
less.

Begging belief on MY Facebook PAGE the 3rd November 2013


that Denis O Brien will outbid the mightier Goldman Sachs (for
whom he is a stakeholder by way of the Trilateral Commission) for
TOPAZ-SHELL who as will be seen are only separated on paper.
Bank of Ireland-Denis O Brien-KPMG v Goldman Sachs or
rewarded by Goldman Sachs.
What followed is the usual trail of corruption created over time by
Denis who bought the controlling stake on the 13 th December 2013
watched on or cheered by FG,FF,Banks,Corporations and The
Usual Suspects mentioned in each company especially AngloIBRC and NAMA.
Whats not in the Denis O Brien controlled spINDO Fionnan
Sheehan is that John Mulcahy of NAMA will be busy as his
company Jones Lang LaSalle was also one of those in the leaked
IBRC creditors list who are now transferring unsold borrowings to

the National Asset Management Agency via theirs and Denis O


Briens friends KPMP .
Among them are borrowings related to TV3, Arnotts, the Racing
Post, Topaz and stockbrokers Davy.
The Irish investors who own the Racing Post said they would bid
for their own borrowings of 150m. There is also speculation TV3
would try to buy back its loans.
Arnotts borrowings of 200m have been linked to Selfridges and
the House of Fraser.
Davy had paid off more than half its loan and plans to purchase the
outstanding 140m.
Two bids were expected for the 185m loan of petrol retailer Topaz,
with one coming from its significant shareholder Denis OBrien.
So is Denis stealing more shares in our our oil to Shell back to
us..and are they all buying back their own shares which were
ours for pittance from their own friends ?
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/goldman-joins-in-faceofffor-185m-topaz-anglo-loans-29674133.html
Thinking of and watching #thepipe #rossport as predicted on the
3rd November 2013 and it pained me to be right as there should
not be this level of corruption ignored by so called governance
when Denis O Brien bought for pittance the controlling share in
Topaz 13-12-2013 from his mates yet owes millions to the indirect
bank who took over the direct bank and NAMA who he purchased
from with Bank of Ireland where Denis sat on the board also.
OBrien gains control of Topaz as Davy partners buy stockbroker
Roisin Burke
Draghi Speaks At The World Economic ForumDenis OBrien,
Irish billionaire and chairman of Digicel Group Ltd., right, speaks
during a meeting at the Hotel Seehoff on day three of the World
Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Friday, Jan. 25,
2013. World leaders, influential executives, bankers and policy
makers attend the 43rd annual meeting of the World Economic
Forum in Davos, the five day event runs from Jan. 23-27.

Photographer: Jason Alden/Bloomberg *** Local Caption ***Denis


OBrienI
Businessman Denis OBrien is set to gain control of Irelands
biggest petrol retailer while investment company Doughty Hanson
has bought back its loans in TV3.

1
2
Mr OBrien (pictured), the founder of the mobile phone company
Digicel and a key shareholder in the publisher of this newspaper, is
set to buy 304m worth of loans linked to Topaz, sources involved
in the sale told the Irish Independent yesterday.
Topaz has 330 service stations across Ireland. Mr OBriens
spokesman did not respond to questions.
The Topaz deal is part of a loan auction that also included the debt
of businesses including Arnotts and the Racing Post. Final bids
closed last Friday and the special liquidator is now selling the loans
in most cases. At least four sale deals have been agreed, it is
understood.
Private equity manager Doughty Hanson said last night that it
bought 250m debt attached to TV3. David McRedmond, who is
the chief executive of TV3, said the deal ended an uncertain
period for the company.
Finance Minister Michael Noonan welcomed the conclusion of the
bidding phase, saying that the special liquidators expect that 84pc
of the portfolio will be sold to third parties for prices in excess of
the independent valuations.
The remainder will go to NAMA. About 2.5bn face value worth of
loans were put up for sale as part of the 22bn IBRC liquidation.

Mr OBrien fought off Topaz founder Neil OLearys finance


company Ion Equity and a consortium that included Mark
McGoldricks Mount Kellett and Goldman Sachs.
Davy Stockbrokers confirmed last night that partners had bought
the 140m debt linked to a management buy-out with financing
from Bank of Ireland.
Dublin private equity group FL Partners was said by one source to
have bought some of its borrowing but to have also been
unsuccessful on the Racing Post.
Borrowers are said to have had the edge in bidding for their own
loans. The level of information available to non-borrower bidders
was criticised by some bidders as having been too sparse.
Dialogue was continuing yesterday between bidders and KPMG.
Big-name investors looked over the data on this book of trading
businesses, including John Graykens Lone Star and Kennedy
Wilson.
See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/obriengains-control-of-topaz-as-davy-partners-buy-stockbroker29834280.html#sthash.ylSBS51q.dpuf
In 1999, Saga Petroleum became a part of Norsk Hydro and in
2007 a part of Statoil. In July 2009, Vermilion Energy acquired
Marathon Oils stake in the project.[6]
Statoil service stations in the Republic of Ireland began to rebrand
as Topaz, following the acquisition of the company in 2006 by Irish
oil firm Topaz Energy Group.
Statoil is a partner of Royal Dutch Shell in the Corrib gas project,
which entails developing a natural gas field off the northwest coast
of Ireland. The project has proved controversial with some Irish
residents. In the summer of 2005, five men from County
Mayo were jailed for contempt of court after refusing to obey a
temporary court injunction forbidding them to interfere with work
being undertaken on their land. The ensuing protests led to
the Shell to Sea campaign that opposes the project.

Statoil service stations in the Republic of Ireland began to rebrand


as Topaz, following the acquisition of the company in 2006 by Irish
oil firm Topaz Energy Group.
Topaz has indeed quietly removed all mention of Shell from its
retail brochures and marketing material, but it is still a Shell
licensee, and happy to own up to it for an international audience.
About Topaz
In 2005 Topaz Energy purchased the oil products business of Irish
Shell and Shell Northern Ireland. It went on to acquire Statoil
Ireland in 2006. Topaz Energy currently operates as a licensee for
both brands in Ireland.
Laura ? Laura ? come back Laura
Topaz is not a Shell Licensee & has no Involvement with the
Shell Corrib Gas Project
by Laura Topaz Fri Apr 29, 2011 15:32
Hi Ferdia, SAyed and other interested parties. In 2005, Topaz
Energy Ltd. bought the retail and commercial fuels business of
Shell in Ireland, following that companys decision to disengage
from its downstream activities in the Irish market. In 2006, Topaz
purchased the Statoil business in Ireland. Topaz rebranded the
complete network of previous Shell and Statoil sites in 2008 but
between 2005 and 2008, Topaz Energy Ltd. were obliged (By
Shell) to refer to the company as a Shell licensee. The brochure
posted above is out-dated and from this time. We are no longer a
Shell licensee. The 1,400 Topaz employees are not paid by Shell
or Statoil, but by Topaz Energy Ltd., a 100% Irish owned and run
business.
I have clarified categorically that Topaz Energy Ltd. are not
associated in any way with the Corrib Oil Gas project, are not a
front for Shell and are not a Shell licensee.
Thanks,
Laura from Topaz
Question
by Ferdia S2S Fri Apr 29, 2011 16:59

Thank you for that clarification. Another question: Do Topaz drill for
and refine their own fuel products, including placing them for sale
on
their forecourts? This is a genuine enquiry, because I dont
honestly know. If its the case that they dont and that they merely
sell the
products of other oil Companies, particularly Shell, then theyre
part of the problem, not the solution. It has always been my
assumption
that much of the petrol in Topazs pumps is supplied by Shell, who
take their cut without the hassle of people turning up to vent their
anger at the treatment of Erris people and the Giveaway of our
Natural Resourses. Im totally open to correction on that, and Im
hoping
youll stay with this thread for a while, because if youre a troll
youre at least quite a well-mannerred one. So the question is:
whose fuel
products are Topaz selling, and what kind of cut is each side
getting?
A fair question.
by Jherek Carnelian Hawkwind Fri Apr 29, 2011 17:05
and we expect the Commercial Marketing Co-ordinator with Topaz
to have all the answers.
Wondrin why
by Porky None Fri Apr 29, 2011 19:36
Cant figure why Laura felt the need to come on here, considering
that this thread had become more inactive than the space between
eamon Ryans ears. But now that she has, i think shes opened a
can of worms, because the question Ferdia is asking is a good
one. I think wed all like to know what the connection is, if any
between shell and Topaz. If this lady is a co ordinator ro whatever.
she should answer the question. I hope she hasnt gone to ground
becase, to be fair, everyone has treated her wiyh respect so far, so
seh has nothing to fear. But maybe she has something to hide.

Topaz is Shell in Ireland


by SAyed Mon May 02, 2011 11:57
There seems to be a very strong connection between Shell and
Topaz, despite what Laura
says. http://www.topazenergy.ie/en/news/TOPAZ-AND-SHELLAVIATLAND/
Maybe she could explain why every other country in Europe has
Shell stations except this one, and no other country has Topaz
stations except Ireland.
Its not that Shell is using Topaz as a front in this country is it?
Topaz is an Irish petroleum retail chain, operating all over
the island of Ireland. The legal entity was formed in 2005 and
previously traded under the Statoil and Shell brands, until 2008
when the Topaz brand replaced both in Ireland. [citation
needed] Topaz, a 100% Irish owned and managed company is
Irelands largest fuels and convenience retailer.[citation needed] It is
also the largest supplier of home heating oil in Ireland. [citation
needed] It is a secondary of Ion Equity Limited, a venture capital
company that also used to ownSWS Group and USIT.
History[edit]
The company was formed by Ion Equity in 2005 as a vehicle to
take over part of the Irish operations of Royal Dutch Shell plc (the
filling station and home heating operation, Irish Shell Limited) as
well as the Irish operations of Statoil. This was controversial in
itself, as the Competition Authority, which must approve
large mergers and acquisitions, failed to take a decision on the
takeover of Statoils assets within the time frame allowed, thus
automatically approving the deal. This was the first time this had
happened in the Authoritys history. [citation needed]
The company was slow to reveal its branding strategy, continuing
at first to trade under the Shell, Statoil, and Fareplay brands. [citation
needed] However, beginning in 2008, Topaz began replacing both
these brands with its own. The Fareplay brand, which Topaz owns
worldwide rights to, has also been retired and replaced with a

number of Topaz convenience store brands including Topaz


Restore and Topaz Express.
As of 2012, Topaz currently operates 118 Company Owned
Company Operated (COCO) sites in the Republic of Ireland and 1
site in Larne, County Antrim, Northern Ireland. It is due to roll out a
new loyalty scheme in 2013.
The current CEO is John Williamson have been appointed in
February 2012. Williamson previously held the role of CF.
Topaz spending 50m rebranding Shell and Statoil stations
nationwide
By Niamh Hennessy
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
TOPAZ, the private business group backed by Denis OBrien, is
investing 50 million in rebranding the countrys Statoil and Shell
service stations as well as the expansion its network.
The move follows the purchase by Topaz of the Irish retail and
commercial fuels businesses of Shell and Statoil in 2005 and 2006.
Topaz says the planned expansion will create 400 new jobs and is
largely confined to the greater Dublin area. However, the company
said it is also looking for opportunities in the Munster area, which it
sees as a key geographic location.
As well as the 350 Statoil and Shell stations, the rebrand will
include 100 convenience stores, 250 trucks and seven sea
terminals.
Topaz chief executive Danny Murray said the companys ambition
was to redefine the service station experience for Irish consumers.
We want to put the consumer at the heart of our business model
and get away from the Big Oil approach to retailing. Were looking
forward to working through our directly owned stations and through
our dealer and distributor networks to transform the offering for
Irish consumers, he said.
Mr Murray added that the company wants to double the value of
non-fuel sales over the coming years.
They already sell four million cups of coffee, eight million cold

drinks, two million sandwiches, five million newspapers and 14


million confectionery products a year.
The first two Topaz-branded service stations and stores opened
yesterday at Dublin Port and at Citywest in Dublin.
Topaz, one of Irelands largest privately-owned companies, has a
turnover of over 3.5 billion a year.
It directly employs 1,300 people in Ireland and is owned by ION
Equity and other investors, one of which is believed to be
businessman Denis OBrien.
ST BIZ TODAY
Interesting stuff from Aine Coffey and Brian Carey in the ST Biz
today on Topaz and Denis OBrien.
Topaz(which imports about half of the States motor and home
heating fuel and almost all of the aviation fuel) was caught short by
the IRBC liquidation and had to refinance its working capital
arrangements with BOI, reportedly in the space of 24 hours.
Denis OBrien owns 28% of Topaz and Neil OLeary of Ion Equity
owns around 35%. That goes back to a deal in 2005 when Ion and
OBrien took over former Shell and Statoil interests in part using
loans from Anglo.
Now Denis OBrien is objecting to attempts by Topaz to refinance
its discount invocing facility tthrough AIB and BOI and has written
in the last fortnight to the banks and shareholders involved to
signal his interest in acquiring the entire debt owed and reinvesting
with a view to taking control of the company.
Game over as far as ownership of Topaz is concerned.
It should be recalled that OBrien got a write down of 64 million
from IRBC last year when partnering with Trafigura to take control
of UK oil refiner and distributor Blue Ocean Associates.

Tax Dispute Denis on the move;


http://thestory.ie/2013/05/12/denis-obrien-v-inspector-of-taxes-thee57-8m-dispute/
Brian Cowen and former AIB chief appointed to board of Topaz
Newly appointed non-executives also include Emmet ONeill of
Smiles Dental
Former taoiseach Brian Cowen has been apointed to the board of
Topaz
In October 1994, it was revealed that Cowen had 1,000 shares in
Arcon, a company to which he was in the process of awarding a
mining licence. He quickly sold the shares and apologised in the
Dil for causing himself and his colleagues some
embarrassment.

Arcon International Resources plc[edit]


Arcon is an Irish registered mineral and mining exploration
organisation. It manages the Galmoy Zinc Mine, carrying out
foregoing mineral exploration activities.[4] Galmoy is now run by
the Swedish owned company Lundin.
Conroy Diamonds and Gold see Trilateral Commission members

Conroy Diamonds and Gold was established in 1995 to exploit the


discovery of the Galmoy Ore deposits now in production as a
major zinc mine. Its current activities are on a geological structure
known as the Longford-Down Massif.[6]
Mark Paul
Sat, May 3, 2014, 12:37
First published:Fri, May 2, 2014, 17:51
Topaz, the fuel and retail chain owned by Denis OBrien, has
appointed former taoiseach Brian Cowen and Colm Doherty, the
former managing director of AIB who was appointed in 2009 after
the bank guarantee, as directors of the company.

Mr OBrien, who bought out Topazs loans from Irish Bank


Resolution Corporation to take control of the company last year,
has also joined the board of the company, which has revenues of
about 3.2 billion and controls about a quarter of the Irish forecourt
market.
Lucy Gaffney, a long-time associate of Mr OBriens who also sits
on the board of Independent News and Media (IN&M), has also
become a director. Sean Corkery, who is the chief executive of Mr
OBriens building services company Siteserv, has also joined the
board.
Denis OBriens Topaz nominees bring excess baggage on board
Mr OBriens nephew, Emmet ONeill, who recently sold Smiles
Dental for 36 million, has also become a director of the company.

Topaz has refused to confirm the fees that will be paid to Mr


Cowen and the other directors to serve as directors.
John Callaghan will remain as the chairman of the board of Topaz,
along with its chief executive, John Williamson, while Niall
Devereux, the companys chief financial officer, also joins the
board.
The company made a loss of 13 million last year. Mr OBrien, who
had been a minority shareholder alongside Neil OLearys Ion
Equity, gained full cotnrol last year when he bought its 300 million
of loans from IBRC for about 50c in the euro.
Ray Burke FF Lobbied OR Coerced
Shell to Sea, Ray Burke, and the irresistible gombeenism of
Ireland
There is a strong element of NIMBYism in Ireland. If you want to
widen your gateposts in Dublin, theres always a chance that
someone in Kerry could object redefining the very concept. Or if
you want to link towns and cities with a motorway (statistically the
safest roads) or replace death-trap bridges (see Slane) there will
be no shortage of consciensious objectors trying to put the
mockers on it.
So I have to admit when I heard, way back when, that protesters
were out blocking the roads in Mayo reciting the Rosary as
Gaeilge, no less in objection to Shells proposed gas pipeline
going over their land, I was a bit sceptical to put it very mildly.
But just as the State took such a major role in suppressing dissent
when Ronald Ronald Reagan visited these shores many years ago
with a special fondness in his heart for the imbeciles of
Ballyporeen you have to wonder if they have some kind of point.
Oh, and at that time the Irish prime minister was espoused liberal,
Garret Fitzgerald. Welcome Ronnie the warmonger.
Remember too, that the Irish government has never been behind
the door when prostitiuing us to the multinationals. OK, weve more
jobs nowadays than we did in the 80s, but there is such a thing as
protection.

Then theres the payoff. While having Google and Microsoft here
gives us jobs, you have to wonder about us being the prime
facilitators of corporate tax-dodging in the EU. Ask anyone
employed in one of these concerns and the answer will be
predictable. And understandable. But?
So, no surprise tben, that the Irish government sold us so short
when they wrote the Corrib exploration rights off to Shell. Professor
John M Simmie, from the chemistry facuilty of NUI Galway,
maintained in the Irish Times of August 23rd, 2005, that at that
time, the country had neither the trained personnel nor the funds to
wildcat for oil and gas. It would have been a giant gamble at a time
when our economy could not have sustained such a shock.
OK, 50/1 are odds that the most optimistic gambler would shirk at,
but even if your horse wins because the rest of the field falls down,
you wouldnt have backed it unless you thought there was some
chance of winning. But it seems that corrupt Fianna Fail politician,
Ray Burke, lobbied to abolish existing legislation of the time
which gave the State a 50% stake in any discoveries to facilitate
Shells deployment here. You can look further into this at the Shell
to Sea website here.
For my part, I know we need energy resources, I know we need
investment, I know we need infrastructure. But I also know that if
someone like Ray Burke was involved in Shells investment here,
you have to wonder.
In times like this we need to make the most of the few assets we
have to get some semblance of profit for our pains whilst keeping
within international safety standards .

Denis & Bank of Ireland


By Pat Boyle 12-04-2000
THE appointment of Denis OBrien as a director of the Bank of
Ireland officially a member of the Court of the bank is a
recognition of his enormous achievements in business in a

comparatively short time.


The bank said little about the appointment but insiders believe it
marks a significant departure from traditional court appointments.
Directors have almost always been drawn from the ranks of those
representing the accountancy or legal professions, as well as
those from the construction and agri-business industries. These
stalwarts have been topped off with the odd estate agent or
packaging industry chief, but rarely does a full-blooded
entrepreneur get a look in.
Ironically perhaps, the only high profile entrepreneur to precede Mr
OBrien to the Court was his former employer and sometime
mentor, Tony Ryan of GPA.
However, the former GPA chief already held a 5pc stake in the
bank when he was invited to join the board.
Mr OBrien, on the other hand, has no significant holding yet, at
any rate in Bank of Ireland.
Apart from his status as an entrepreneur, Bank of Ireland will be
able to draw on his experience of the communications industry
revolution, the coalface of the modern business world and the
bedrock of the `new economy.
It will not be lost on many players in this industry that Mr OBrien
was forced to go to the US to get financial backing for the vision
that eventually became Esat.
Bank of Ireland, along with its counterparts in the Irish finance
world, has played a minimal role in funding new economy ventures,
only waking up to the potential of the communications revolution
late in the day.
In his new role as a director, Mr OBrien will have to attend monthly
board meetings at which the day-to-day business of the bank is
discussed.
He will also have to attend a couple of longer meetings, which see
the board members holed up for a couple of days to conduct a
more in-depth review of the banks business and to explore
strategies.

Mr OBrien will doubtless be asked to sit on or even chair one or


more of the three special committees which deal with the audit
business, remuneration of senior executives and with social affairs.
But it will be his expected input into the strategic reviews which will
excite most interest.
As one insider put it: We have made a major catch here, someone
who has been hugely successful in a short period of time and who
has a high profile in one of the most important areas of the
economy.
Dr Ryans tenure as a director coincided with a difficult time for the
bank as its exposure to losses in the US led to a hopeless
performance by the groups shares.
Eventually, Dr Ryan sold his stock and quit the court.
Bank of Ireland will be hoping that Mr OBriens tenure is marked
by happier times.
Now, at least, Bank of Ireland has someone on board with firsthand experience of the technology revolution and of the difficulties
faced by young entrepreneurs in securing capital.
It would indeed be a pity if the feared meltdown in technology
stocks does now materialise, just as the old economy mandarins
have woken up to its potential!
By Joe Brennan and Finbarr Flynn
Published 28/01/2012
Bank of Ireland has taken the medicine, the telecoms mogul
Denis O Brien said in an interview with Bloomberg at the World
Economic Forums annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland.
Bank of Irelands Top Ten Equity Partners at the same time Denis
cited returning to the fold as BOI had cleaned up their act that he
was part of the Iniatiation in 2000.
1.BNP Paribas http://www.icij.org/offshore/french-banks-underpalm-trees
2.JP MORGAN http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-1019/jpmorgan-said-to-have-reached-13-billion-u-s-accord.html

3.PRYSMIAN ;Indirectly controlled by Goldman Sachs


http://en.cn.prysmian.com/about-us/history.html
4.Roche ; The worlds largest maker of cancer
drugs/death/vaccines http://www.omsj.org/corruption/rocheoverlooks-80000-adverse-reaction-complaints
5.Volkswagen ; Porsche-Piech families-Mafia Third Reichhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/business/designing-cars-forhitler-porsche-and-volkswagen-s-nazi-roots-a-637368.html
6.Continental ;Schaeffler- Wal-Mart and usual suspect bankers
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-05/schaeffler-said-toset-pricing-on-6-billion-euros-of-loans.html
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/03/german-schaefflerscandal-gets-hairy/
7.Microsoft ; Tax Evasion & of course corruption
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-microsoft-avoids-taxesloopholes-irs-2013-1
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexandrawrage/2013/03/20/microsoftwhistleblower-allegations-highlight-global-corruption-risks/
8.Repsol ; Oil, & THE USUAL GREED
http://www.globalwitness.org/sites/default/files/import/libya_oil_sca
ndal_points_to_need_for_new_laws.pdf
9.Societe Generale ; Banks of the usual sort
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34227_162-57539428/ The
Socit Gnrale scandal was one of the first fractures in the
facade of what was then broadly perceived as an aggressive but
essentially self-regulating financial system, giving rise to early calls
against excessive risk-taking and lavish bonuses that have grown
steadily louder since.
It came not long after the first indications of the subprime mortgage
crisis surfaced in the United States in August 2007 and was
followed in March and September of 2008 by the demise of two
flagship investment banks, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. In
December of that year, Bernard L. Madoffs Ponzi scheme was
uncovered, a fraud that set investors back more than $20 billion,

according to estimates by the court-appointed trustee overseeing


the case.More recently, Fabrice Tourre, another French banker,
and his employer, Goldman Sachs, were sued by the U.S.
Securities Exchange Commission in April for creating and selling
mortgage products that regulators contend were secretly devised
to fail.
10.Wal Mart ; 31cent an hour child labour- Hazardous wasteWalmarts main Money Store partners, GE Capital-Mexico Briberyhttp://www.salon.com/2013/10/14/very_sneaky_wal_mart_how_the
_mega_retailer_rolled_back_california_regulations/
While Irish banks have written down their assets to market values
and been recapitalised, other banks around Europe havent done
a mark-to-market, he added.
The billionaire also had good words to say about Ireland.
We have taken the cod-liver oil, he said. Ireland is definitely on
the turn.
Bank of Ireland shares closed little changed in Dublin after hitting a
seven-month high the previous day.
Mr OBrien, who has a 22pc stake in Independent News & Media,
resigned as deputy chairman of Bank of Ireland in September
2006.
He joined the banks board as a director in April 2000. (Bloomberg)
Irish Independent
See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/denisobrien-prepared-to-invest-as-boi-cleans-up-act26815629.html#sthash.jLUciCKG.dpuf
OBrien wants deposit guarantees quadrupled and the banks
stuffed with government cash.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/europe-banks-need-tarp-like-aiddenis-obrien-says/2012/06/21/gJQAN3QYtV_video.html
Back to Ion Equity
Board of Directors
Neil OLeary Ion Equity Chairman

Neil is the founder, Chairman and CEO of Ion Equity, and also the
Chairman of Topaz Energy and a director of USIT and
SouthWestern and many other businesses. Neil has conceived and
led most of Ions acquisitions.
Neil is a former investment banker and director of UBS Ltd,
London, where he was responsible for executing many
international transactions across a number of sectors. While a
Senior Executive of the London Stock Exchange he had
responsibility for listings and market intelligence as a lawyer with
McCann FitzGerald. He is a Member of UCC Foundation and Soul
of Haiti Foundation.

Jim Costello CEO & Executive Director.


Jim Costello has been with SouthWestern since 2003. A Qualified
Accountant (FCMA) he previously spent 15 years in the
Information Technology and Outsourcing sectors internationally. He
was Finance Director for Unisys Corporation in Europe (EMEA),
General Manager of Managed Services in France and Global
Managing Director of the Unisys/Dell Managed Services Alliance.
Through this experience, Jims career has been involved in
delivering mission critical solutions for large and major customers
around the world where excellent service has always been the
benchmark. Jim has studied Business excellence models in the
University of Ulster and Stanford University, California.

Daniel ODonohoe Ion Equity. Non-Executive Director.


Daniel ODonohoe joined Ion Equity in 2006 and has experience in
all aspects of mergers, acquisitions, corporate development,
restructuring and private equity investing. Daniel previously worked
with AIB Corporate Finance, ING Barings and KPMG and profile
advisory transactions include assisting the Grafton Group with its
353 million takeover of Heiton Group plc and assisting the

Musgrave Group on its stg232 million takeover of Budgens plc in


the UK.
Daniel is a Chartered Accountant with a degree in Economics and
he studied International Business at Harvard University.
Joe Walsh Non-Executive Director
Joseph Joe Walsh is a former member of the Irish Government
and a successful business Director. As Minister for Agriculture and
Food, Joe Walsh was conferred with an Honorary Doctorate from
Saint Josephs University, Philadelphia, in 1999 for his strategic
vision and commitment towards securing Irelands position in the
growing European and global market for food and drink.
Joe retired from politics in 2005 and has since run a number of
Directorships for leading Irish organisations.
Kieran Calnan Non-Executive Director
As a senior manager of the SWS Group for 25 years culminating in
his appointment as Chief Executive in 1996, Mr. Calnan oversaw
the diversification of SWS from a single service provider
(agricultural services) to a multi-service company that included
Renewables, Business Process Outsourcing, Forestry and
Business Services.
Currently Kieran is Chairman of the Board of BIM (Bord Iascaigh
Mhara/Irish Fisheries Board). He is a member of the Advisory
Committee of the UCC Ignite programme, an initiative that aims to
promote entrepreneurship. Mr. Calnan also played an active role in
promoting the award winning West Cork Fuschia brand (aimed at
marketing quality products including seafood from the West Cork
area) during its formative years.
Paddy Morrissey CFO & Executive Director
Paddy qualified as a chartered accountant in 1997. Between then
and 2008, Paddy worked primarily in the financial services industry
for companies such as KPMG in the Channel Islands and Fortis

and FEXCO in Ireland. Paddy has gained invaluable experience in


areas such as audit and internal control, financial control and
analysis, systems implementation and treasury management.
Paddy has overall responsibility for the Finance Department of
SouthWestern and also supports the other members of the
management team in managing various aspects of the business on
a day to day basis.
Paddy is a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in
Ireland and is an associate member of the Association of
Corporate Treasurers (ACT).

Tim Cowhig Non-Executive Director


Tim is currently CEO of Element Power managing global projects
in the renewable energy industry. Tim is a chartered accountant
with over 20 years commercial experience, he was instrumental in
setting up SWS Energy where, as CEO and Executive Director, he
oversaw nearly 200MW of operational wind and 400MW of
development projects ahead of its sale to Bord Gais in December
2009.
Tim holds a Bachelor of Commerce Degree from University
College, Cork. Tim is a member of Institute of Directors and an
Associate of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.

Ulric Kenny Ion Equity. Non-Executive Director


A co-founder of Ion Equity, Ulric has led a number of its
investments since the inception of the business such as SWS
Energy and Ocean Media Group.
Prior to co-founding Ion Equity in 2000, Ulric worked in transaction
services in PricewaterhouseCoopers London and in audit roles
with that firm in Toronto and Waterford. He is a fellow of the
Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland.
The Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year is run in association

with The Irish Times, RTE, Enterprise Ireland, InterTradeIreland,


Invest Northern Ireland, Trinity Business School and Digicel.
The 2008 Shortlist Finalists see attached table
The 12 members of the Judging Panel are:
Denis OBrien, Digicel Group (Chair), (Ernst & Young Entrepreneur
Of The Year 1998)
Aidan Heavey, Tullow Oil PLC (Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The
Year 2005)
Brian Long, Atlantic Bridge Partners (Ernst & Young Technology
Entrepreneur Of The Year 2000)
Pat Maher, Executive Director, Enterprise Ireland
Liam Nellis, Chief Executive, InterTradeIreland
Jerry Kennelly, CEO, Kilmackillogue Capital (Ernst & Young
Emerging Entrepreneur Of The Year 2005)
Padraig OCeidigh, Chairman, Aer Arann Express (Ernst & Young
Entrepreneur of the Year 2002)
Liam Shanahan, Shanahan Engineering (Ernst & Young
Entrepreneur of the Year 2003)
Donal Durkin, Director of Creative and Design-based Industries,
Invest Northern Ireland
Ann Heraty, CPL Resources Plc. (Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of
The Year 2006)
Pat McDonagh, Third Force (Ernst & Young Master Entrepreneur
Of The Year 2000)
Michael Carey, Executive Chairman, Jacob Fruitfield Food Group.
(Ernst & Young Industry Entrepreneur Of The Year 2005)
International
Entrepreneur Company Business Activity
Founded Location
John Flaherty C&F Group
Global Sheet Metal
Specialist 1989Galway
Donal ORiain Ecocem Materials Ltd
Carbon
Neutral Concrete
2000 Dublin
David Bobbett H&K International Restaurant
Equipment Systems Worldwide
2002 Dublin
Sean Keenan Multis Group Remanufacturing &

Remarketing 1994Galway
Xavier McAuliff
Spectra Group
Photographic/Hotel & Property Development
1970Kilkenny
Danny Moore Wombat Financial Software
Financial Trading Solutions
1997Antrim
Conor Foley
Worldspreads Group Financial Spread
Trading 2000Dublin
Brendan ORegan
Zenith Technologies Ltd Process
Automation & Control
1998Cork
Industry
Entrepreneur Company Business Activity
Founded Location
Lord Kilclooney Alpha Newspaper Group Newspaper
Publishing, Printing, Radio Media
1983Tyrone
Pat OFlynn
AVR Safeway Ltd
Sustainable
Solutions for Hazardous Waste 1998Cork
Michael Cullen Beacon Medical Group
Healthcare
2002Dublin
Stephen Grant Grant Engineering (Ireland) Ltd
Engineering
1978Offaly
Howard Beggs Helix Health Ltd
Healthcare
Information and Communications Technology 1996
Dublin
Neil OLeary
Ion Equity Private Equity Investors
2000Dublin
Orla Corr McAvoy Off-Site Building Solutions Off-Site
Building Construction
1973Tyrone
Terence Brannigan Resource Group
Support
Services 2006Antrim
Emerging
Entrepreneur CompanyBusiness Activity
Founded Location
Tom Marren
CES Energy
CHP/Tri-Generation.
District Heating/Cooling & Photovoltaic 2002Dublin
Eugene Greene
Cooneen Watts & Stone Ltd
Military Clothing
2004Tyrone
Patricia OHagan
Core Systems (NI) Ltd
Core
Systems (NI) Ltd
2003Antrim
Tom Brennan & Patsy Carney EirGen Pharma
Pharmaceutical
2005Waterford
Eric Mosley
Globoforce Ltd Incentive Management

Solutions 1999Boston/Dublin
Sean Rowland Hibernia College
Education 2000
Dublin
Mark Heffernan
Opsona Therapeutics Ltd
Biotechnology 2004Dublin

Cronies ? Rewards ..Senator Averil Power is an Irish Fianna Fil


politician. She was elected to the 24th Seanad in April 2011 by the
Industrial and Commercial Panel,[2] She grew up in a council
estate, forgot her roots completely and claims to be the first person
in her family to finish school and go to college.She is married to
Denis O Briens trusty sidekick Irish Independent political editor
Fionnan Sheahan.Prior to her election to the Seanad, she worked
as policy adviser to former corrupt FF Minister Mary Hanafin.
http://childaware.net/alpha/index.php?
view=article&catid=37%3Acorruption&id=742%3Ahanafin-last-actof-betrayel-andcronyism&format=pdf&option=com_content&Itemid=79
Very interesting article on OBrien also. Its worth recalling that one
of Seanie Fitzpatricks sons works for Digicel. Also Fitzpatricks
daughter, Sarah, worked as a volunteer for Haven, OBriens Haiti
charity.
Very curious that the article didnt appear in the Irish edition of The
Sunday Times. Or maybe not.
OBrien is currently being a social entrepreneur in Haiti where his
company is involved in digital communications contracts.

Supreme-Court-of-Judicature-of-Jamaica-26TH-SEPTEMBER2016

http://supremecourt.gov.jm/sit
es/default/files/courtlist/Supre
me-Court-of-Judicature-ofJamaica-26TH-SEPTEMBER2016.pdf
Supreme Court of Judicature
of Jamaica Civil Division List
of Sittings for the week
commencing the 26TH
September, 2016
http://supremecourt.gov.jm/sit
es/default/files/courtlist/SUPR
EME-COURT-LIST-FOR-THEWEEK-OF-THE-26TH-OFSEPTEMBER-2016.pdf

Welcome to the Supreme Court of


Jamaica

"Welcome to the website of the Supreme Court of Jamaica. The


purpose of this website is to provide visitors with information about
the Supreme and Parish Courts and to provide an interface for
accessing information on the procedures and daily activities at the
Supreme Court.
Our Courts play an essential role in protecting our constitutional
rights to equal and due process under the law. Both criminal and
civil courts provide the opportunity for the parties to have their
cases heard by neutral judges and/or juries. This process ensures
that all cases are decided in a fair and consistent manner. Based on
the role of the Court, it is fair to say that Courts are at the nucleus of
the justice system. Therefore a healthy Court system is important to
a healthy justice system.

A strong and independent judiciary is at the core of democracy. It


has been said that if you want to measure the level of freedom in
any country, the first thing to be determined is whether that
nations Judiciary is truly independent, from other branches of
government and from all other influences of power, because
ultimately a free society depends upon a judiciary that is loyal only
to the law. Our Judiciary is committed to performing their role
skillfully and impartially.
We hope that you will find this site to be user friendly and the
information useful. We invite your comments as to the usefulness of
the information provided as well as your ideas for other content to
be posted. Finally, please help us provide a quality product by
letting us know if you encounter any difficulties while navigating
through the site or otherwise."

Clintons close friend


Denis OBrien battles
massive criticism in
Ireland
James O'Shea @IrishCentral June 08, 2015

Former president Bill Clinton wrote in a September


2012 Time Magazine cover story that Irish
businessman Denis OBriens move to make cash
transactions available for the poorest in the world
via cell phones was the number one idea in
changing the world.
The Time cover story featuring Clinton holding a
globe is entitled 5 Ideas that are changing the
World and OBriens idea was rated tops.
It must have been a heady moment for the Dublinborn OBrien (57) who studied business at Boston
College.
As a businessman OBrien is high up the Forbes
list. His net worth was estimated at $6.7 billion
thanks mostly to his stock in his cell phone

company Digicel. But it is as a philanthropist that


he has become increasingly well known.
Also in 2012, The New York Times published a
glowing front page report on OBriens work in Haiti
in which OBrien was described as leading the
international efforts to restore the economy there.
Forbes wrote, O'Brien received the National Order
of Honor and Merit from the Haitian president for
his work helping Haiti recover from the 2010
earthquake. He funded the restoration of Haiti's
century-old Iron Market with his own money, and
has built 50 primary and secondary schools in the
last 18 months.
In Irish American circles he is best known for his
staunch support of the American Ireland Fund and
also the Third World charity Concern, where he is a
leading benefactor.
OBrien is Irelands leading philanthropist but now
also one of the most reviled figures there.
It is an extraordinary paradox that surrounds his
business success how he made his fortune and
now how he is handling revelations about his
banking and business affairs.
For a man described by Clinton as changing the
world more than anyone else for the betterment of
the poor recent negative press provides a dizzying
contrast.
Over the past few weeks in Ireland there has been
massive criticism of OBrien after he went to court
to prevent RTE, Irelands national broadcaster,
reporting on his banking relationship with IBRC, the
successor bank to Anglo Irish Bank, which was at
the center of the banking scandal that almost
bankrupted Ireland.
An activist member of parliament, Catherine
Murphy, claimed in the Dail (Parliament) that

O'Brien had received massive loans up to $500


million at an interest rate of 1.5 percent.
OBrien strongly denied that Murphy's claim was
true as did Mike Aynsley the former CEO of IBRC
who described that information as grossly
inaccurate.
The government has established a commission of
inquiry to discover what the true facts of the
matter are. Murphy is sticking to her guns that her
statements are accurate.
OBriens move to muzzle RTE and later to seek to
use the injunction to prevent Murphy's speech
made in the Dail under privilege from being
reported created a storm of controversy and
criticism.
Because Ireland lacks a first amendment it is a
very litigious society. Another billionaire, Dermot
Desmond, recently threatened to sue after being
photographed at a funeral when he did not want to
be. But seeking to silence a speaker in the national
parliament was seen as a move too far by many
commentators.
The IBRC loan was the latest in a perfect storm of
controversy for OBrien, who also is the major
shareholder in Independent Newspapers.
One of his many companies, Siteserv, received the
contract to install the hated Irish Water meters,
which have been the subject of numerous mass
demonstrations as the government seeks to raise
tax revenues by charging for water.
OBrien invested in several Irish companies in
recent times explaining that vulture capitalists
were stripping Irish assets and he wanted Irish
companies to retain Irish shareholders. One of
those companies was Siteserv and there have also
been allegations he paid under the odds for it.
He provides over 10,000 jobs in Ireland, but the

recent controversies have damaged much of the


goodwill he should have enjoyed.
In a piece defending his legal and business moves
and his right to privacy on his bank accounts
OBrien wrote that a close friend warned him he
would get dogs abuse if he purchased Irish
businesses, something that has certainly come to
pass.
OBrien is nothing but resilient, however. He has
been controversial for many years, ever since he
purchased the second cell phone license during
Ireland's wild west days when he was allegedly
aided by the sitting government minister.
His international reputation, especially his
connections to the Clintons, remain very strong
however, and the domestic issues seem unlikely to
damage that.
Still, for Ireland's richest Irish-born man and
leading philanthropist, these must be trying times
indeed.

Denis O'Brien
establishes
scholarship for Irish
nationals to study
business at Boston
College
April 11, 2015

Denis O'Brien

Irish entrepreneur and philanthropist Denis OBrien has


established a scholarship for Irish students pursuing an
MBA at Boston Colleges Carroll School of Management.
The Denis OBrien Fellowship will provide two
students from Ireland annually with a fully-funded
masters degree from the college, a press release
has announced.
OBrien, who is the chairman and principal
shareholder of the cellular company Digicel Group,
and the owner and board member of
Communicorp, Irelands largest media holding
company, graduated from Boston College with an
MBA in corporate finance in 1982.
He created the fellowship to provide an
opportunity for aspiring business leaders from
Ireland to obtain a world-class graduate education
at a premier American university.

The scholarship will cover the full cost of


attendance, including tuition, fees, books and
living expenses for the duration of the MBA
program, as well as international travel to and from
Boston. Candidates must be Irish citizens of
exceptional academic and/or career achievement,
who possess the high personal and professional
standards of the programs namesake.
Boston College and Ireland have had a long and
illustrious association, said OBrien. I am
delighted to continue this with a Scholarship
Program for two Irish nationals to have the
opportunity to pursue a two-year MBA program in
management at Boston College."
Andy Boynton, dean of Boston Colleges Carroll
School of Management, said: We are honored that
Denis has created the OBrien Fellowship at Boston
College, as it will provide an invaluable opportunity
for Irish students who want to pursue an MBA at
one of the top business schools in the United
States. He is a person who has brought acclaim to
his alma mater as a student, global business leader
and generous alumnus. We are grateful for his
support.
Boston Colleges Carroll School of Management,
located in Chestnut Hill, Mass., was ranked fourth
among business schools in the United States by
Bloomberg/BusinessWeek.
More information on the O'Brien fellowhip,
including how to apply, can be found at:
http://www.bc.edu/schools/csom/graduate/admissio
ns/scholarships/obrienfellowship.h

YOUR APPLICATION CHECKLIST

Candidates for the Denis O'Brien BC MBA '82


Fellowship must be Irish citizens whose academic,
professional, and other accomplishments reflect
the high professional and personal standards of Mr.
OBrien, one of Irelands most prominent
entrepreneurial and philanthropic leaders.
With our newly streamlined process, when you
have the following materials ready to go, your
online application can easily be completed in an
hour or less, in just one session.
One letter of recommendation
One personal essay
A polished resume
Transcripts from each college or university in which
you were enrolled
GMAT or GRE scores from within the past five years
Employment History, using the form provided
within the online application
Admission interview by a member of the MBA
Admission Committee
Application fee of $100 USD is waived for Irish
citizens. Please email bcmba@bc.edu prior to
submitting your application to receive waiver. We
look forward to considering you for the MBA
program.
http://mba.bc.edu/denis-obrien-fellowshipapplication

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

DENIS O'BRIEN
Chairman
Denis OBrien founded Esat Telecom Group (Esat) in
1991 to compete against the former state-owned
telephone company in Ireland, Eircom plc. In October
1997, Esat, of which Denis was Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer, listed on Nasdaq (New York), Easdaq

(Amsterdam) and the Iseq (Dublin). Esat, over a fiveyear period, raised $1 billion in equity and bonds in a
number of successful U.S. and European public
offerings.
Esat established itself as the number two
telecommunications company across the full spectrum
of telecommunications services (corporate and
residential), fixed-line, GSM mobile, data and internet
services and brought real competition and choice to
the Irish telecommunications market. Esat Telecom
Group plc was sold to British Telecom Group plc in
January 2000 for $2.8 billion. Denis was voted
Irelands Entrepreneur of the Year in 1998 in the
inaugural running of the worldwide competition
organised and sponsored by Ernst & Young.
Denis is also a director of a number of private
companies, which hold some of his other business
interests including Quinta do Lago SA, Topaz Energy
Group Limited and Communicorp Group Limited. In
addition, Denis is the Chairman and Co-Founder of
Frontline, the International Foundation for the
Protection of Human Rights Defenders and a member
of the board of Concern Worldwide.
He holds a B.A. from University College Dublin and an
MBA from Boston College, and he has an honorary
Doctorate of Laws from University College Dublin.
Denis is also Chairman of Digicel Holdings Ltd. and
Digicel PNG, subsidiaries of Digicel Group Ltd. Denis
has been Chairman of the board of directors since
2000.

https://www.digicelgroup.com/en/about/leadership/
denis-o-brien.html
As a privately held company, we only make financial
information available to authorised institutions.
Institutional investors should direct their inquiries to:
Group Head of Investor Relations, David Marshall
Email: david.marshall@digicelgroup.com

Group Investor Relations Executive, Conor MacCarrick


Email: conor.maccarrick@digicelgroup.com
Digicel Jamaica Foundation
Established in 2004, it has been working to facilitate
sustainable national development in the core areas of
education, special needs and community
development. Highlights include over 400
development projects impacting 446,000 Jamaicans
with a total investment of over US$20million.
The focus now and in the future is on increased
literacy in primary schools, higher quality schools and
training for Special Needs communities as well as
further opportunities for communities to become selfreliant through entrepreneurship.
Digicel Haiti Foundation
Established in 2007, it works to strengthen
communities through the support of community-based
activities primarily in the area of education. Highlights
include over 50,000 children attending one of the 150
schools built by the Foundation across the country and
our teacher training programme having trained over
700 individuals. In addition, the community projects
small grants programme has benefited hundreds of
thousands of people since launch.
Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_2014_2015
http://www.digicelfoundation.org/content/dam/digicel/F
oundation/Jamaica/annualreports/Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_2014_201
5.pdf
Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_Report_2013_201
4

http://www.digicelfoundation.org/content/dam/digic
el/Foundation/Jamaica/annualreports/Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_Report
_2013_2014.pdf

Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_Report_2010_2
011
http://www.digicelfoundation.org/content/dam/digic
el/Foundation/Jamaica/annualreports/Digicel_Jamaica_Foundation_Annual_Report
_2010_2011.pdf

Digicel Foundation donates play equipment to the Arnett


Gardens Recreational Park
Recreational Equipment valued in excess of $2 Million was
donated to and installed at the Arnett Gardens playground
in St. Andrew by the Digicel Foundation during the latter
half of 2004.
Liberty Academy will soon be opening new doors as a
Digicel Foundation Centre of Excellence, with refurbished
classrooms specifically catering to children with special
needs. Located on Hope Road, the Liberty Academy is an
independent institution founded in 1994 that aims to
create a balanced environment for special needs and
highly functional children at the pre, junior and high school
levels. The school is currently in construction phase, and is
being expanded by the Foundation, to be able to
accommodate even more children with special needs in
the schools inclusive education programme. Equipped
with a special education department, the school thrives to
make both special needs children and typically performing
children feel included in all activities. According to the
schools Principal, Suzanne Williams, the school currently
has an enrolment of 33 special needs children with
challenges ranging from autism to downs syndrome,
dyslexia, cerebral palsy and hearing impairments. Williams
explained, We offer our programme in two ways, we have
self-contained classrooms then you have children who are
integrated into the regular programme and are performing

well. We try to get both sets of children to interact, so they


are mixed during physical education, music and a variety
of classes. They also share devotion and are involved in a
number of extracurricular activities such as gymnastics
and performing arts. The Academy will soon be able to
facilitate an additional 60 special needs children as of
early 2015 when they officially open their refurbished
facilities. The Digicel Foundation has graciously come on
board and is in the process of refurbishing the special
needs department so that we can expand our services and
accommodate more children. The Foundation has also
provided quite a bit of training to our teachers to improve
their skills and this has worked very well, Williams said.
The work currently being done by the Foundation includes
the addition of two classrooms, refurbishing of the
bathrooms to allow for wheelchair access, as well as
access to the buildings via ramps. Work also includes
improvements in the flooring, electrical wiring, fencing,
roofing and the provision of a fire alarm system. For
Williams the expansion is a dream come true. She said, I
am delighted; it has always been part of our vision as a
school from the beginning to create an institution to
students with varying disabilities. I am excited about the
programme development. It is a real joy to watch these
students through care and stimulation find niche areas
they can excel in. You can see it in their physical
demeanour, once they walked with their heads down and
now they carry themselves different with their heads high.
Were into transforming lives.

Grants Program
In Haiti, there is an adage which goes men anpil chay
pa lou it means that where there are many hands,
the burden is little. With this meaningful proverb in
mind, Digicel Foundation recognizes how vital it is to
work in concert with local communities to guide
community members towards a better life.
Upon opening its doors in 2007, the foundation
embarked on a mission to assist in the development of
its communities. Not long after, both Digicel and the

Digicel Foundation began serving thousands of


families who lost everything in the floods of Gonaives.
From there, the Digicel Foundation began making
substantial impressions across Haiti.
Over the last nine years, more than one million people
have been touched by the foundations social
investments in various sectors; including education
and capacity building, special needs, human rights,
the environment, water accessibility, improved health
and sanitation, agriculture, and technology. Because of
our partners remarkable efforts, adults have learned
how to read, Special Olympic athletes earned a
historic twelve medals center stage at the World
Games, many lives were spared from cholera, and
thousands of youth gained access to development
programs.
The Digicel Foundation Grants Program has already
invested in more than 120 projects. With its
longstanding partners, and new partners it hopes to
meet along the way, the foundation hopes to deliver
many more life-changing projects, while bringing
countless hands together to lessen lifes burden for
the most vulnerable populations.
Together we can!

School
Construction
The Digicel Foundation was still being established in
Haiti when an eager group of Digicel employees
headed to Ecole Mixte Lageho; a primary school in the

hurricane-ravaged Pont Janvier, in the rural community


of Thomazeau. The school was a dilapidated,
windowless,tin structure with dirt flooring, no
partitions between the classrooms, and no furniture for
the students. On that day, it became clear to those
eager Digicel employees, that improving the learning
environment for the estimated 200 children who
attended that school, would become Digicel
Foundations first project in Haiti.
On March 5th, 2007, less than six months after the
initial visit to Ecole Mixte Lageho, the Digicel
Foundation was officially launched in a joyous
ceremony that marked the completion of the
rebuilding of Ecole Mixte Lageho in record time. The
primary school, with six new fully furnished
classrooms, and a proper administration had become a
bright and energizing learning center. The day was
drawing to a close when Denis OBrien, Digicel
Chairman and Digicel Foundation Patron, who travelled
to Haiti for the special occasion, announced that he
had a new challenge for the team the new goal was
to rebuild a total of 20 schools by March 2008. The
school construction program was ushered in, and grew
to transform the learning environments of tens of
thousands of children across Haitis 10 departments.
The program intensified after the 2010 earthquake
with a commitment to rebuilding an additional 130
schools. The 150th school was inaugurated on
November 19th , 2014. To date, the Digicel Foundation
has selected an additional 25 school construction
projects which it intends to complete by March 2017.
Watunou Primary School in the Alotau District of Milne Bay
Province opened the doors to its new library infrastructure
on Tuesday 15th March 2016 in a colourful official opening
ceremony in the presence of the school and residents of
the surrounding community. The signature white walls and
red roof, which has become synonymous with Digicel PNG
Foundation funded infrastructure, was immaculately
decorated, ready to be opened and utilised by the eager,

bubbly students of Watunou Primary School. The Primary


School first received a double classroom in 2012 and over
the course of time built more classroom infrastructure and
doubled their student enrolment numbers. Digicel PNG
Foundation in recognising their community ownership and
good governance have rewarded the school with a library
worth K 110,000. The infrastructure comes fully kitted with
library shelves, library books, solar lighting, a teachers
desk and chair, students desks and a desktop computer
for cataloguing and setting up the library system. Two key
things which form part of our assessment criteria, when
auditing schools for a library reward are good governance
and community ownership. I commend the Board,
teachers and students of Watunou Primary School for
maintaining and looking after the classroom and also
growing this school. When our first infrastructure went up
here in 2012, we planted a seed which has bloomed and is
evident in how the school is growing and prospering. It is
very encouraging to see our communities taking
ownership to improve the lives of our people, especially
the young generation, said Beatrice Mahuru, CEO of
Digicel PNG Foundation. The launch was attended by
Guests of Honour, Governor of Milne Bay, Honourable Titus
Philemon and Minister for National Planning and Member
for Alotau Open, Honourable Charles Abel. Both Members
of Parliament expressed deep gratitude for Digicel PNG
Foundations investment in their province and also for our
partnership in development and attributed Digicel's
telecommunications services to connecting their maritime
province.

Denis OBrien, BC MBA82 Fellowship


Global business leader, entrepreneur, philanthropist, and humanitarian
advocate Denis OBrien, who received an MBA from Boston College in
1982, has generously created the Denis OBrien Fellowship at the
university. Irish citizens who matriculate in the Carroll School of
Managements full-time MBA program may qualify for the Denis OBrien
Fellowship.
Candidates for the fellowship must be Irish citizens whose academic,
professional, and other accomplishments reflect the high professional and
personal standards of Mr. OBrien, one of Irelands most prominent

entrepreneurial and philanthropic leaders.


The OBrien Fellowship will cover the full cost of attendance, including
tuition, fees, books, and living expenses for two years (or the duration of
the MBA program), as well as international travel. Eligible candidates will
receive consideration for the fellowship during the initial application review
by the Admissions Committee.
The admission of the first cohort of two OBrien Fellows to our two-year
MBA program will begin in the fall of 2016; a second cohort of two
students would be admitted in the fall of 2017; and a third cohort of two
students would be admitted in the fall of 2018.

Denis OBrien
Founder and patron

ADMISSION CRITERIA

The Carroll School of Management seeks to enroll a diverse class of bright


and creative future business leaders. We seek candidates who are driven
to make an impact in business and society.
In evaluating applications for consideration for the Denis OBrien
Fellowship, Dean Andy Boynton and members of the MBA Admissions
Committee look for academic excellence, strong work experience, and
outstanding potential for leadership. Courses in business administration or
management are not required, but students are expected to be proficient
in communication skills and mathematics.

APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS & DEADLINES

Application Requirements:
Boston College welcomes applications from graduates of accredited
colleges and universities. Please submit the online application for
admission, together with the following materials:
Current resume, including education and employment history
Academic transcripts from every college or university in which you were
enrolled in a degree-granting program
GMAT or GRE scores from within the past five years; GMAT school code:
44x-J5-96, GRE school code: 3033
Employment History, using the form provided within the online
application
Recommendation from an individual who can provide an objective
appraisal of your capacity for rigorous graduate study and your potential
for professional success
Personal essay, 500 words, 12 point font, double-spaced
Application fee of $100 USD is waived for Irish citizens. Please email
bcmba@bc.edu prior to submitting your application to receive waiver.
Admission interview by a member of the MBA Admission Committee
A class profile of the BC MBA Class of 2016 can be found on the BC
website. This profile includes data on both the applicant pool and enrolling
class, including academic measures, professional profile, and diversity.
Application Deadline:
Applications must be received by January 15, 2017 and complete (all
application requirements met) by February 15, 2017. Fellowship decision
notification will be made by March 15, 2017. By entering into the
application process, applicants must agree to share select application and

biographical information with the O'Brien Foundation.


For more information:
Please refer to our Admissions FAQs or contact the Office of Graduate
Admissions
W: bc.edu/mba
E: bcmba@bc.edu
T: 617.552.3920

http://www.bc.edu/schools/cso
m/graduate/mba/fulltime/class
profile.html
Guide to the Military Service
1916 1923
http://www.militaryarchives.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/MSPC/Guide_to
_the_Military_Service_%281916-1923%29_Pensions_Collection.pdf
http://www.military.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/images/Info_Centre/Doc
s2/archives_docs/summary_information_document_on_the_irish_regi
ments_of_the_british_army.pdf

Garda, Mahon Tribunal Denis O


Brien, Politicians and
Multinationals and Billionaires
Like Obrien and the Enormous
Corruption by Europe in Public
Tax Fraud
Sep 29, 2016 by Rita Cahill
https://www.scribd.com/document/325800086/Garda-MahonTribunal-Denis-O-Brien-Politicians-and-Multinationals-andBillionaires-Like-Obrien-and-the-Enormous-Corruption-by-Europe-inPublic-Tax-F

ACT Anti Corruption Taskforce


PEOPLES ASSEMBLY

'ACT - Anti Corruption Taskforce' will assemble outside the


Head Quarters of the Gardai (Irish Police Force), Phoenix
Park, Dublin 8 at 3.30pm on Sunday 2nd October 2016 to
demand an immediate end to corruption, malfeasance and
criminality within the Gardai.
At this event we will highlight instances of criminal activity
of members of the Gardai, evidence of Gardai perverting
the course of justice and naming and shaming rogue
Gardai in all ranks.
We will also read out a list of a number of people who died
mysteriously in Garda custody over the past 2 decades,
whose deaths were never properly investigated and whose
grieving families have never been given closure.
We will also highlight and call for an immediate END to the
close and cosy relationship which exists between the
Gardai, the Judiciary, the Legal Profession and the
established POLITICAL PARTIES.
'ACT - Anti Corruption Taskforce' will also be making a
public call for the immediate resignation of Garda
Commissioner Norin O' Sullivan on the grounds that she
has NOT, among other things, cleaned up the image of our
police force, she has NOT protected whistleblowers within
the force, she has NOT launched proper investigations into
deaths in Garda custody, she has NOT launched proper
investigations into certain cold case murders and she has
NOT launched proper investigations into the
disappearance of missing people, some of whom are
innocent children.
We invite all groups who are campaigning for social
justice, economic justice and legal justice or any other like
minded campaigns to join with us in highlighting and
fighting corruption in Ireland on SUNDAY 2nd OCTOBER @
3.30pm at Garda HQ, Phoenix Park.

Denis O'Brien's Company Installing Water Meters

There was some controversy over on politics.ie some time ago


about the prospect of someone criticised in the Moriarty
Tribunal getting the contract to install our water meters
through the possible takeover of Siteserve. Well DOB front
Millington has now indeed taken over Siteserve. Siteserve has
been sold to Millington, which is an acquistion vehicle
controlled by Denis O'Brien. The installation of water meters
will be implemented by GMC/Sierra Ltd, J Murphy & Sons Ltd,
and Coffey Northumbrian Ltd. Sierra is part of the Siteserve
Group.
There was some controversy over on politics.ie some time ago
about the prospect of someone criticised in the Moriarty
Tribunal getting the contract to install our water meters
through the possible takeover of Siteserve. Well DOB front
Millington has now indeed taken over Siteserve. Siteserve has
been sold to Millington, which is an acquistion vehicle
controlled by Denis O'Brien. The installation of water meters
will be implemented by GMC/Sierra Ltd, J Murphy & Sons Ltd,
and Coffey Northumbrian Ltd. Sierra is part of the Siteserve
Group.
http://www.politics.ie/forum/current-affairs/213636-denisobrien- etc ...
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/water-meterinstallati etc ...
Given the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal report is this
appropriate?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moriarty_Tribunal#2011_Findings
Conclusions
Lowry "secured the winning" of the 1995 mobile licence for
O'Brien.
O'Brien made two payments to Lowry in 1996 and 1999
totalling IR500,000 (GB147,000 and GB300,000) and
supported a loan of GB420,000 given to Lowry in 1999, a
benefit equivalent to a payment.
Lowry imparted substantive information to O'Brien which was
"of significant value and assistance to him in securing the
licence".

Lowry bypassed consideration by his Cabinet colleagues and


thereby not only influenced, but delivered the result for Esat
Digifone.
A US$50,000 donation to Fine Gael was made through Telenor
on behalf of Esat Digifone.
Lowry sought to influence a hike in the lease for Marlborough
House (Telecom Eireann headquarters) following a request
from Mr Dunne. These rent increases would have improperly
enriched Dunne, and were deemed to be "profoundly corrupt".
Lowry was criticised for his "cynical and venal abuse of office"
and his brazen refusal to acknowledge the impropriety of his
financial arrangements with O'Brien and Dunne

The 13, which include developers such as Joe O'Reilly and


Bernard McNamara, owed a total of 13.9bn in March
2009, according to a government review by accountants
PWC, which was completed around May of that year.
PWC told the Government that the bank's top borrowers
would only cost the State 629m and that the bank was
"not unreasonable" in its prediction in March 2009 that
losses on the entire loan book would only be 4bn.
This figure has since ballooned to between 25bn and
30bn demonstrating how badly the property crash
caught out the then government and its many advisers.
IBRC's biggest individual borrower by a long stretch is the
family of Sean Quinn, which then owed the State 2.2bn,
and they are joined on the list by a number of Ireland's
best-known property developers.
Denis O'Brien, the telecoms entrepreneur, is listed as
owing Anglo Irish Bank 833.8m on foot of personal and
corporate loans just after the bank was nationalised in
2009, making him its then sixth largest borrower.
Mr O'Brien has over the past three years reduced his
borrowings to under 500m using cash generated by his
Caribbean and Pacific-based mobile phone empire.
Ireland's fourth richest man is understood to hope to
reduce his borrowings to 300m some time this year as
part of an extensive, agreed debt-repayment plan. He has
not missed an interest payment and is considered the
bank's best-performing large borrower.

Mr O'Brien's mobile phone company Digicel has debts to


various banks of billions but it also had revenues last year
of $2.23bn and earnings of $954m making it more than
capable of servicing its debts.
Digicel raised $250m in February through a bond issue
which was used to buy a rival mobile phone company in
Haiti for $97m. Some of this money, combined with
Digicel's strong cash generation, may have been used to
reduce Mr O'Brien's debts to IBRC and to fund his 45m
acquisition of Siteserv, the infrastructure and utilities
support services business.
This purchase was controversial as the taxpayer took a
105m hit on Siteserv's sale and there were allegations
that the company might have been sold for more to a trade
buyer. This has been denied by Siteserv and its advisers.
Mr O'Brien's borrowings from Anglo go back to when he
founded 98FM, the Dublin pop radio station, and
continued as he bid for Ireland's second mobile phone
business. It lent to him when he set up Digicel in the
Caribbean and branched into golf and property
investments.
The multibillionaire, who employs 2,000 people in
Ireland, has defended his friend Sean FitzPatrick, Anglo's
former chairman, who has become a scapegoat for
Ireland's entire economic collapse. "Anglo Irish Bank has
been blamed for absolutely everything that has gone
wrong in Irish banking. That is both wrong and unfair,"
Mr O'Brien said in 2009.
Much of Mr O'Brien's and his fellow 12 borrowers' lending
took place under David Drumm, Mr FitzPatrick's
successor as chief executive, with funding from German
and French money markets.
Denis O'Brien is the largest single shareholder in
Independent News & Media, the publisher of the Sunday
Independent. He has lost an estimated 500m on his 21.6
per cent stake in the media group.

The story so far:

Denis OBrien owes Anglo hundreds of millions.


Siteserv owes Anglo 144 million.
Denis buys Siteserv debt-free for 45 million in
cash.
Now?
A FRENCH company has claimed it was denied the
opportunity to make an offer for Irish company
SiteservThe Altrad group, which owns companies in
the same areas of business as Siteserv, said at the
weekend that it had been prepared to offer 60
million for the Irish firm. But it was effectively
denied the opportunity because its
representative was told the Irish group was
not for sale.
Also:
Yesterday, the Sunday Business Post reported that the
underbidder for Siteserv is understood to have offered
a higher price for the company. Sources said that
Australian hedge fund Anchorage Capital had put
more money on the table, but elements of the offer
were considered less attractive then the OBrien bid,
the newspaper reported.
The full minimum wage would give a gross annual salary below
19,000 per annum for a 40-hour week.
The law requires individuals to challenge issues in the
workplace, and gives employers the right to refuse to deal with
workers collectively. Legally, an individual can challenge illegal
behaviour, but we put the onus on them rather than putting in
place structures to ensure their rights are in fact observed. (In
contrast, Sweden requires companies to have worker directors,
and has strong collective bargaining rights.)
Our income distribution is poor. The EU countries with worse
income inequality than us are Spain, Latvia, Bulgaria,
Romania, Greece, Lithuania, Portugal, Italy and Estonia.

If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating


the people who are being oppressed, and loving the
people who are doing the oppressing.

Interview with Emmet O'Neill from


Smiles at the

This is Emmet ONeill.


Hes the nephew of
media baron Denis
OBrien and was recently
appointed to the board of
Topaz alongside our
glorious ex-Taoiseach, the
big ignorant whatever
from Offaly.
Given the media hysterics about our dear

democracy being threatened by the mob,


what do some of those on receiving end of
protest think? Topaz
is being targeted because of Uncle Deniss
connection to meter installers GMC Sierra. So
heres a few tid bits of political
philosophy from Emmet back in January 2012
when he was boss man at Smiles.

This is Emmet ONeill. Hes the nephew of media baron


Denis OBrien and was recently appointed to the board of
Topaz alongside our glorious ex-Taoiseach, the big ignorant
whatever from Offaly.
He says in this video..
"What frustrates me is the constant bad news in the
media. It drives me mad. I feel what we need is a five year
period of dictatorship, sort it all out, give it back to us and
not allow anyone to have an opinion.
Imagine what he thinks OFF CAMERA...

Archie Talks
Jan 30, 2012
Emmet O'Neill from Smile Dental interviewed at the Archie
Talks. Find out more about Smiles here http://www.smiles.ie/.
Find out more about the Archie Talks and Archipelago here
http://www.archipelago.ie / or check us out on Facebook here

http://www.facebook.com/www.archipela..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBAToW-MbOk&feature=share

Whatfrustratesmeistheconstantbadnewsinthe
media.Itdrivesmemad.Ifeelwhatweneedisa
fiveyearperiodofdictatorship,sortitallout,give
itbacktousandnotallowanyonetohavean
opinion.
Ah sure maybe hes only codding, says no
one ever as our collective jaws drop. Hes
punted the idea around before too. Look at
that smile. He loves the idea. Maybe he
picked it up in his UCD BComm?
Props to Johnny Leaflet on Facepuke for the
tip-off.

oin us as we send a clear message to Denis O'Brien and


his mates in the Government and Irish Water that if they
don't stop bullying us, beating us, trying to jail us and
steeling our resources then we will expand the struggle
and bring them to account.
Denis owns Topaz and he also owns GMC Sierra who not
only are illegally trying to install meters on a people who
don't want them but are trying to jail 19 ordinary North
Dublin residents who have stood up to him.
He is the richest man in Ireland, worth over 3 billion and
still pays no tax here.

A UCD business graduate! Enough


said. Those chaps were born in suits,
educated thinking the have a God
given right to be exempt from the
others in society! Todate have never
taken a UCD graduate seriously!
Join us, bring your own banners, bring your family and

friend, bring whistles.....

OBrien dragged into US presidential


campaign
SEPTEMBER 29, 2016

Clinton business links are Trump's latest target. Pic: Getty

Trump highlights Clinton links in statements attacking


rival
US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has brought
Irish businessman Denis OBrien into his latest attack on
Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.
In a statement published on his website, Trump makes disparaging
comments about OBrien, who is referred to as a "cell phone tycoon
with close ties to the Clintons". The statement includes links to a
number of media reports and commentary on controversies
surrounding OBrien and his business activities.
It links to a Clinton Foundation list of donors which says that
OBrien and his Digicel mobile phone company have donated
between $10m and $25m to the foundation.
The statement also goes into detail about the award of the second
mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone in 1995 and the subsequent
establishment and findings of the Moriarty Tribunal, again with
links to Irish media reports. It also highlights the controversy over
OBriens purchase of Siteserv, which sparked the setting up of a
Commission of Investigation into IBRC, the former Anglo Irish
Bank.
it also refers to various legal actions involving the businessman in
Ireland.
The OBrien release is one of a series labelled Follow the Money
released on Trumps website, which focuses on alleged links
between the Clintons and a number of business people.

http://www.businesspost.ie/obri
en-dragged-into-uspresidential-campaign/

Hillary Clinton's poll lead has been eroded. Pic: Getty

Democratic candidate's lead among women and young


people has narrowed
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are locked in a tied two-way
race for the presidency as they head to Hofstra University in New
York on Monday night for one of the most highly anticipated
debates in modern politics.
The Republican and Democratic nominees each get 46 per cent of
likely voters in a head-to-head contest in the latest Bloomberg
Politics national poll, while Trump leads 43 per cent to Clintons 41
per cent when third-party candidates are included.
Clinton faces higher expectations as tens of millions of people tune
in for a television spectacle that could reach Super Bowl viewership
levels. About half, 49 per cent, say they anticipate the former
secretary of state will perform better, while 39 per cent believe
Trump will win the debate.
Ann Selzer, the Iowa-based pollster who oversaw the survey, said
there were signs that Clintons margins with women and young
voters have eroded over the past three months, helping to explain
Trumps gains.
Clinton had a 6-point advantage on Trump in the two-way race in
August and a 4-point advantage when third-party candidates Gary

Johnson and Jill Stein were included. She had a 12-point edge on
Trump in June, when Johnson was also included.
The Democrat had a 26-point lead among female likely voters in
June, when she was tested against both Trump and Johnson. She
has a 13-point advantage in this poll when measured only against
Trump, getting 52 per cent to his 39 per centsimilar to her 15point advantage in August.
Among likely voters under 35 years old, Clinton gets 50 per cent to
Trumps 40 per cent, down from her 29-point margin in August in
the two-way race and from her 26-point margin in June in the
three-way race.
The polls margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 points. It was taken
from Wednesday to Saturday, after Clinton took political heat for
calling half of Trumps supporters deplorables and for disclosing
she had pneumonia after a video caught her falling ill at a
September 11 ceremony.
Both major nominees face skepticism from a majority of likely
voters about their trustworthiness and their willingness to tell the
public everything it wants to know to decide if they are fit to serve.
More than seven in 10 rate Clintons truthfulness as just fair or
poor, while more than six in 10 say that of Trump.
The most connected man in Ireland you've never heard of" according to a
well researched piece in last Sunday's IMOS by Ben Haugh and Michael
O'Farrell
Dix is in the news at the moment because he's the only director of
Siteserv to remain in place since its sale to Millington in March 2012 and
because of his connection to the Longford Centre Parcs resort deal
announced last month.
Some details from the IMOS piece:
* Dix worked for over twenty years at KMPG
* He's a member of Howth Yacht Club and once raced with Richie
Burrows, the former BOI governor. Dix is now chairman of BOI Private
Banking. He was appointed to the Harnessing our Ocean Wealth Taskforce
by Simon Coveney in 2013. He was in a consortium with Coveney's father
Hugh that put together the Irish entry in the 1989 Whitbread Race.
* He and his wife own a 50% share of three apartments in Douglas in
Cork. Her brother Brian McKiernan, CEO of Davy Stockbrokers, owns the
other 50%Dix has been a director of Center Parcs Ireland since March.
The company is owned, via a company in Luxembourg, by a Blackstonecontrolled entity in the Cayman Islands.
* From the IMOS: Asked about the Centre Parc Longford deal, Coillte, led

since April 15 by former Coveney adviser Fergal Leamy, said it could not
comment on commercially sensitive matters. Centre Parcs said Mr Dix had
been recommended to them as their new Irish company required an Irish
board member.
Asked who had recommended him the spokesperson responded I dont
know Asked if Mr Dix played any role in negotiations at government level,
the spokesperson said Mr Dix has had no involvement in any
organisations regarding this project
*Dix and former IRBC executive Richard Woodhouse have set up a
company called The Working Capital Company which plans to provide
finance for SMEs.
Woodhouse was the executive who was in charge of tracking down Quinn
assets for IRBC up until its liquidation. Dix was given a similar role in
relation to Quinn when KMPG liquidator Kieran Wallace took over.
* He was also appointed as a director of Kilkennys private Aut Even
Hospital last year when it was taken into receivership under Wallace last
year.
It was reported that Denis OBrien was looking at a possible purchase but
opted for the Sandyford Beacon Hospital instead.
Bilderberg buddies Simon Coveney and Denis OBrien, just another spindle
on the web of corruption.
On the register of members's interests on the Kildare Street website,
Coveney declared the following... Shares: (1) Private Wealth Managers, 72
Merrion Square, Dublin 2: wealth management investment group; (2)
Coveney Family Investment Club, 49 Dawson Street (This is the address
of Davy stockbrokers, I suppose Coveney family investment club has a
softer ring to it!), Dublin 2: family investment fund."
72 Merrion Sq is the address that FL partners operate out of, FL was
founded by Peter Crowley and Neill Hughes in 2006, it is an "investment
boutique" with typical deals of between "25m-500m", no small change
indeed. Wherever there's big money around, DO'B won't be far away....
Neill Hughes
"Neill was Chief Executive Officer of Island Capital, an in-house corporate
finance resource and investment fund for Denis OBrien, one of Irelands
most successful entrepreneurs, from 2000 to 2004. During this time Neill
led the fund-raising for the growth of Digicel from license purchase/startup to today (ca. 1bn EBITDA). While at Island Capital, Neill also
completed a number of significant public and private transactions
including the take-private of PGA European Tour Courses plc and the
purchase with management of Sita Environmentals Irish businesses".
Peter Crowley
Prior to establishing FL Partners, Peter was Chief Executive Officer of IBI
Corporate Finance, Irelands leading corporate finance house, for seven
years ending in September 2006. The Crowley family are highly
influential in Irish society, his brothers Vincent Crowley, chief operating
officer of DOBs Independent News & Media (INM); Niall Crowley, ex-chief
executive of the Equality Authority and Maurice Crowley, general manager
at AIB for 26 yrs, recently Maurice worked as Programme Director for EBS
Building Society/Anglo Irish Bank integrations.
FL partners are the moneymen behind UTV Ireland and Im sure they had

the blessing of the corrupt coalition when UTV was granted a broadcasting
license for the Rep. last year. UTV has taken channel 6 from RTE newsnow
which has been moved to channel 21 on Saorview. (no prizes for guessing
who will be supplying UTV with news
They like to call Ireland the best little country in the world to do
business, it certainly is if you dont pay a cent tax here, get 100s of
million in debt written off for numerous companies at tax payers expense
and have puppet politicians passing legislation to ensure that future
competition will be non-existent http://www.irishtimes.com/.../newmedia-merger-guidelines.... Back in 2012 DOBs nephew Emmet ONeill
said this, I feel what we need is a five-year period of dictatorship, sort it
all out, give it back to us and not allow anyone to have an opinion. Im
not sure what year of the dictatorship were in now but if enough people
dont wake up to this cabal then things will get a whole lot worse.
Simon Coveney has been keeping a low profile amongst the FG puppets
lately and has so far steered clear of the IW fiasco, Coveney is also
rumored to be the next leader of FG when Enda packs it in, mark my
words, hes one to keep a close eye on.

Irelands ranking shows how little faith investors have in our ability
to prevent the abuse of power. Our failure to hold people to account
for wrongdoing is also having a negative impact on international
perceptions of Ireland. There appears to have been very little action
taken on foot of the publication of the final Moriarty Tribunal report,
while The Taoiseachs decision to make public appearances with
Denis OBrien after the publication of the report will have done our
international reputation no favours Transparency International,
5th December 2012

The man who owns 29.9% of Independent News and Media, the
countrys biggest private media group and who is widely seen as
controlling the group with a long-term associate installed as
chairman and two nominated directors on the board, is also the
man who controls the countrys largest private radio group,
Communicorp and indeed his so-called right hand man Paul
Connolly owns 50% of Elevation Media Limited which in turn owns

100% of F5 Communications (Ireland) Limited which produces the


premier domestic business magazine, Business and Finance this
man is Denis OBrien.
And this morning, he is mentioned twice in the release which
accompanies the publication of the annual Corruption Perceptions
Index by Transparency International, an index which tracks
countries worldwide in making their countries more honest. The
2011 Index has Ireland falling a record 11 places to be the
25th cleanest, most honest country in the world in 2010 we were
regarded by Transparency International as being the 14th most
honest country in the world, six places ABOVE our neighbours in the
UK; today, the UK has leapfrogged us and we are today one place
BELOW the UK.
Our deterioration is blamed on what Transparency Internationals
Irish chief executive, John Devitt, says is our failure to hold people
to account for wrong doing.
The statement accompanying todays publication of the index states
The poor results come after a succession of political controversies.
The Moriarty and Mahon Tribunals published negative findings
against politicians and business people after 15 year-long
investigations into corruption and payments to government
ministers. There was further controversy a year after the publication
of the final Moriarty Tribunal report when the Taoiseach shared a
platform at Wall Street with Denis OBrien, a leading businessman
linked to clandestine payments to the former minister for
communications, Michael Lowry. Mr Lowry was found to have
influenced the award of the second mobile phone licence to Mr
OBriens consortium in 1995.
This is the scene at the New York Stock Exchange on 19th March
2012 and the Sunday Independent previously claimed that An
Taoiseach Enda Kenny knew that Denis OBrien would be present 12
days in advance of the event in New York which formed part of the
traditional Irish visitation to the US as part of the annual St Patricks
Day celebrations.

Denis OBrien and Michael Lowry have consistently disputed the


findings of the Moriarty Tribunal, an Irish mechanism whereby a
judge was appointed, initially to examine the finances of politicians
but is probably best known today for examining the circumstances
in which a mobile phone licence was awarded to Denis OBrien in
the mid-1990s when Michael Lowry was the Fine Gael
communications minister. The Tribunal sat for 15 years and its
ultimate cost is yet to be settled but is likely to be in the hundreds
of millions, and it concluded, according to Elaine Byrne writing in
the Sunday Independent in an article which I dont believe is
subject to libel proceedings Judge Moriarty concluded that OBrien
donated almost IR1m in clandestine circumstances to Lowry
who, according to the tribunal, not only influenced, but delivered
the licence.
The latest update from Government on dealing with the Moriarty
Tribunal report, from our soporific justice minister Alan Shatter
appears to have been in May 2012 when he responded to a
parliamentary question by saying I am informed by the Garda
authorities that following their examination of the report of the
Moriarty Tribunal, they are consulting with the Director of Public
Prosecutions as to whether aspects of it may be pursued from a
criminal point of view.
Last year, Michael Lowry lost a libel case taken against former
Independent News and Media journalist Sam Smyth with the judge
in the case stating But of course tribunal hearings and findings
may be reported upon by the media and tribunal findings may
certainly provide a roadmap or trail for other bodies or persons with
an interest in the subject matter of inquiry, be it the Oireachtas, the

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions or litigants who engage


in private litigation. Shorn of this characteristic, the function of
tribunals would be rendered totally nugatory and pointless. The
critical consideration in the cases cited above is that tribunal
findings do not of themselves constitute material of probative value
in such proceedings. They may however point to sources of
evidence which may then be accessed in that separate context.
It seems that only does Denis OBrien operate in some of the most
corrupt countries on the planet according to Transparency
International countries like Haiti but he is now associated with
the reputation of this country deteriorating, though it should be said
that he hasnt been charged or convicted of any crime, disputes the
findings of the Moriarty Tribunal and welcomes the forthcoming
court case taken by the failed bidders for the mobile phone licence
as an opportunity to vindicate his position.
UPDATE: 9th December, 2012. The Irish Times yesterday carried
this story with reaction from Denis OBrien who has apparently
issued a statement which said When contacted by a representative
of Mr OBrien, Mr Devitt revealed that he had included Mr OBriens
name in the press release even though Mr OBriens name was not
mentioned, referred to or raised in any of the documents on which
the index for 2012 was based..when asked who took the decision to
introduce Mr OBriens name he [John Devitt, Transparency
International] responded: I would have taken the final decision
The Irish Times also reports But a statement released by Mr
OBrien last night said Mr Devitt had admitted earlier yesterday
there was no reference to the businessmans name in the surveys
used to compile the index. This is despite a number of mentions of
Mr OBrien in the press release on the index, the statement said.
Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Payments to Politicians and
Related Matters Part I 2006
http://www.moriarty-tribunal.ie/images/SITECONTENT_26.pdf

Moriarty Tribunal Report Part II Volume 1


https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/75525/tribunal-1.pdf

Moriarty Tribunal Report Part II Volume 2


https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/75621/moriarty2.pdf

OBrien: tribunal is concealing


information
MULTI-MILLIONAIRE businessman Denis OBrien has
accused the Moriarty Tribunal of deliberately concealing
information which would have been beneficial to his case.
This comes in the wake of the decision by chairman Justice
Michael Moriarty not to call economist Dr Peter Bacon as a
witness in relation to the awarding of the States second
mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone.
He had been employed by the tribunal at an estimated
cost of 100,000 to draft a report in relation to how the
competition for the licence had been conducted.
Mr OBrien said: This recent and convenient reappraisal
of Mr Bacons status is completely at odds with statements
made and positions previously adopted by the tribunal.
Mr Justice Moriarty, in a ruling posted on the tribunals
website, said he had decided not to call Dr Bacon despite
earlier indications he would.
Mr OBrien said yesterday: I welcome the release of the
tribunals long-awaited ruling on the issue as to whether
or not the tribunal intended to call Peter Bacon as a
witness.
However, I am extremely concerned as to its contents
and by the failure of this ruling to deal with a number of
very important issues concerning the attitude and
procedures adopted by the tribunal in respect of its
dealings with Michael Andersen/Andersen Management
International, the internationally-renowned expert Danish
consultants retained by the Irish Government in 1995 to
advise on the process leading to the awarding of the
second mobile phone licence to Esat Digifone.
I am equally concerned by the tribunals failure in this
ruling to avail of the opportunity to outline in full for the
public benefit the tribunals dealings with Peter Bacon and
the many serious issues that arose from those dealings as
they may affect its ability to make further findings. There
must also be a public concern at the failure in this ruling to
justify the enormous costs to the State of the tribunals
engagement with Mr Bacon, he said.
Mr OBrien is consulting with his legal team.

Peter Bacon, an economist, is manifestly not, and never


was, an expert in the field of mobile telecommunications
competition processes, or indeed in the field of
telecommunications generally, and the tribunals
undisclosed engagement of him in private (prior to any
evidence having been heard) in order to undermine the
evaluation process leading to the awarding of the second
mobile phone licence was completely and fundamentally
wrong.
This position now appears to have been, very belatedly,
accepted by the tribunal, but the consequences of this
failure to abide by proper procedures and due process
remain unaddressed, said Mr OBrien.
Mr Justice Donald Binchy (June 3, 2015). Denis O'Brien-v-RT
redacted judgment (PDF). The High Court. p. 11. Retrieved June 18,
2015. paragraph 20 (e) ...over 300 million

https://static.rasset.ie/documen
ts/news/dob-v-rte-redactedjudgement.pdf
COUCHE-TARD COMPLETES ACQUISITION OF TOPAZ IN
IRELAND

http://corpo.couchetard.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/06/201602-01-Press-Release-ClosingTopaz.pdf

Supreme Court
dismisses O'Brien
Moriarty witness
appeal
Updated / July 12, 2016 14:38

This is the actual article body

The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal


by businessman Denis O'Brien against a High
Court ruling relating to the cross examination
of a key witness at the Moriarty Tribunal.
The High Court had rejected Mr O'Brien's
claim in 2011 that the tribunal had
incorrectly restricted his lawyers' cross
examination of Danish telecommunications
expert, Professor Michael Andersen.

That decision has now been upheld by a five


judge Supreme Court.
Prof Andersen was a witness as part of the
tribunal's investigation into the awarding of
Ireland's second mobile phone licence to Esat
Digifone in the mid 1990s.
Mr O'Brien claimed there was a breach of fair
procedures by the tribunal chairman, Mr
Justice Michael Moriarty in limiting the
amount of time his lawyers had and the
extent of the questions they could ask
Prof Andersen.
Mr O'Brien claimed that Prof Andersen's
evidence was critical to the outcome of the
tribunal.
The professor was managing director of
Andersen Management International, the
consultants engaged by the Department of
Transport, Energy and Communications in
April 1995 to assist civil servants in assessing
the six applications for the licence.
Mr O'Brien wanted to cross examine Prof
Andersen about meetings with lawyers for
the tribunal.
The professor had alleged that the certain
members of the tribunal's legal team were
biased against Esat Digifone.
Lawyers for the tribunal had claimed that
these proceedings were moot - or had little
practical significance or relevance because
Mr O'Brien had not tried to stop the tribunal
publishing the part of its report which dealt
with Prof Andersen's evidence and had not

challenged the report.


It was published in March 2011. The Supreme
Court agreed that the appeal was in fact
moot.
Chief Justice Ms Justice Susan Denham found
that it was a central factor that Prof
Andersen's evidence was favourable to Mr
O'Brien.
She upheld the High Court's ruling that the
Prof Andersen gave evidence, that in his
opinion the tribunal's lawyers were biased,
that he had explained in detail what he
meant, and that the most that could have
been hoped for was that he would repeat
himself and perhaps, "gild the lily".

In her ruling, the Chief Justice said it was


difficult to imagine that anything more
favourable to Mr O'Brien could have been
elicited on cross examination.
She continued that the rulings by the tribunal
chairman in this issue were an illustration of

the case management of a tribunal.


She said it was essential that a tribunal be
case managed by a chairperson.
It became apparent Prof Andersen was
available to give evidence, having previously
declined to do so, some considerable time
after the provisional findings of the tribunal
had been circulated to interested parties, she
added.
She said in circumstances where the
professor had indicated his availability was
limited, it was necessary to indicate the time
available to various parties to cross examine
him.
She said the curtailment of time to Mr
O'Brien's lawyers for a period of six hours
was clearly appropriate and took into account
Mr O'Brien's rights and the rights of other
parties.
It was a balancing of rights that was
eminently reasonable in the circumstances of
the case and it was consistent with fair
procedures, she said.
She found Mr O'Brien's rights to fair
procedures, and constitutional justice had not
been breached.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0712/80185
3-supreme-court-ruling/

Denis O'Brien: High court


injunction prevents Irish
media reporting on
businessman's finances
By Shane Harrison
BBC NI Dublin correspondent
29 May 2015From the section Europe

Image caption
Businessman Denis O'Brien obtained an injunction preventing Irish
media outlets from reporting on certain details of his finances

Ireland's richest man has used a high court injunction


to prevent the country's media covering details of his
personal finances that were mentioned in parliament.
Media mogul Denis O'Brien has a fortune estimated to be
around 5bn.
The purchase of one of his companies has been
discussed in the Dil [Irish parliament].
But media have been unable to report that due to an
injunction deemed to outweigh parliamentary privilege.
Mr O'Brien has extensive media and telecommunication
interests around the world and is the biggest shareholder
in Independent News and Media, the company that owns
the Belfast Telegraph.
He first began to make serious money when he won the
second mobile phone licence in the Republic of Ireland.

Interest
The subsidiary of Siteserv, one of the companies he owns,
is currently involved in installing the controversial meters
for the highly unpopular water charges in Ireland.
Catherine Murphy, a left-wing independent politician, has
obtained details through freedom of information requests
about the sale of the company to Mr O'Brien by the
nationalised former Anglo Irish Bank, now the Irish Bank
Resolution Corporation or IBRC.
75m (105m euros) of taxpayers' money was written-off in
that deal.
But Mr O'Brien obtained an injunction stopping Ireland's
national broadcaster RT and other media outlets from
reporting on certain details of his personal finances and
his relationship with the former Anglo-Irish bank.
On Thursday, Miss Murphy said in the Dil that there was
a significant public interest in Mr O'Brien's finances.
She added that there are large outstanding sums and that
the interest rate he was paying should arguably be much
higher.
The Irish media have not been able to report the detail of
what Miss Murphy said because the Dil's privilege is
outweighed by the high court injunction.
But the information is available on the Dil website and in
the media beyond the island of Ireland.
Because of the injunction, the BBC can only report that Mr
O'Brien was a major debtor to the former Anglo Irish Bank,
and that when his loans had expired he sought the same
terms from the bank that had allowed him to pay off his
own loans in his own time at low interest rates.

Exile
Late on Friday afternoon, RT said it would be making an
application to the high court next week for permission to
broadcast Miss Murphy's statements in the Dil.
The broadcaster said it had "consistently maintained that
greater levels of disclosure is in the public interest;
however we have complied fully with the court's decision".
Mr O'Brien is a noted philanthropist with an interest in
human rights and was involved in bringing the Special
Olympics to Ireland in 2003.
But his critics describe him as a tax exile.
They point out that the Moriarty tribunal into suspected
corruption found that, in the 1990s, Mr O'Brien received
assistance from the then Fine Gael communications
minister Michael Lowry in securing a mobile phone
licence.
Mr Lowry received large sums from Mr O'Brien in complex
financial transactions.
Both men have strongly denied any wrongdoing and no
criminal charges were ever brought in relation to the
findings.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe32936667

Politicians question
Siteserv sale in Irish
parliament
By Shane Harrison
BBC NI Dublin correspondent
24 April 2015From the section Northern Ireland

Image caption
Irish businessman Denis O'Brien

For months now the Republic of Ireland's political debate


has been dominated by the issue of water charges.
But as BBC NI Dublin correspondent Shane Harrison now
reports, there's a major political row because of a new

focus on which companies are benefitting from the


controversial charge.
At one stage, barely a month went by without tens of
thousands taking to the streets to voice their opposition to
water charges and Irish Water, the utility company tasked
with overseeing the project.
At the same time in local communities, particularly in more
deprived areas, there were attempts to stop workers trying
to install the meters.
Arrests, court cases and even jailings followed.
It was not uncommon to see at such protests placards
linking the meters to Denis O'Brien, one of Ireland's richest
men.
He has extensive media and telecommunications interests
across the world including, amongst other newspapers,
the Belfast Telegraph.
'Irish parliament'
He is a noted philanthropist who supports human rights
causes and was involved in bringing the Special Olympics
to Ireland in 2003.
But his critics describe him as a tax exile and point out that
the Moriarty Tribunal into suspected corruption suggested
that in the 1990s he got assistance from the then Fine
Gael Communications minister, Michael Lowry, in securing
a mobile phone license after Mr Lowry received 33,000
($50,000) from Mr O'Brien in a complex financial
transaction.
Judge Moriarty found that that it was "beyond doubt" that
Minister Lowry gave "substantive information to Denis
O'Brien, of significant value and assistance to him in

securing the license" during at least two meetings between


the two.
Both men have strongly denied any wrong-doing and no
criminal charges were ever brought.
The result is that Denis O'Brien has become something of
a bogey-man for the left who believe there may be too
cosy a relationship between him and Fine Gael, the main
government party.
This week the Independent TD, Catherine Murphy,
published heavily redacted or blacked out Freedom of
Information (FOI) material she had received from the
Republic of Ireland's Department of Finance about a
company linked to Denis O'Brien, Siteserv.
It specialises in providing support services to major
infrastructure projects and one of its subsidiaries is
involved in Irish water metering.
'Freedom of Information'
Catherine Murphy's FOI material would appear to suggest
there were concerns in the department about the sale of
Siteserv to Mr O'Brien's companies in 2012 by the
nationalised Irish Banking Resolution Corporation (IBRC),
the former Anglo-Irish Bank and former Irish Nationwide
Building Society.
The sale for 32 million (45m) was controversial because
75m (105m) of taxpayers' money was written off.
The issue has now been raised on successive days by
opposition politicians in the Irish parliament, and there are
calls for an enquiry.
During Leaders' questions in the Dail, Sinn Fein deputy
leader, Mary Lou McDonald, said: "We know that the same

legal advisers acted for both the purchaser and the seller.
"We know that the shareholders got a sweetener of 3.5
million pounds (5m) to ensure that this deal went ahead.
"We know that the Denis O'Brien company was not the
highest bidder and yet they emerged as the successful
bidder. We also know that the Minister for Finance was
briefed on serious concerns by the Department about this
transaction, and briefed on other concerns on other
transactions and the modus operandi of the IRBC," she
said.
'Examine sale'
But the Finance minister, Michael Noonan, has said he
has been reassured that the sale of Siteserv was carried
our properly and in the Irish state's best interest.
He said he and his officials would examine all the files.
In the meantime, further newly-released documents by the
Republic of Ireland's Department of Finance, point to
tensions existing between it and the IBRC on more than
just Siteserv and that Minister Noonan was "not confident"
answering questions about the IBRC, according to the
documents.
In his first comments on the issue, Denis O'Brien said he
did not run the sale of Siteserv; he was merely the buyer.
He told RTE that since his company took over, employee
numbers and revenues had doubled and that he would be
more than happy to appear before the Irish parliament's
Public Accounts Committee (PAC) if and when it examines
the sale.
The Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny has said that the
Comptroller and Auditor General, who oversees public

spending, will examine the sale of Siteserv.


With an election less than a year away and water charges
still very unpopular, even if a majority have grudgingly
signed-up, the Siteserv controversy is too good an
opportunity for the opposition to pass up.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northernireland-32450601

The reputation of one of Irelands best known


businessmen is under fierce attack.
Yesterday the Moriarty Tribunal issued a report that
said a government official, Michael Lowry, had
secured the winning of the 1995 competition for a
mobile phone license for Denis OBriens Esat
Digifone. The report, which comes 14 years after a
formal investigation began and includes more than
2,300 pages in two volumes, essentially alleges that
OBrien made several payments to Lowry including
one for 147,000 pounds. (The report can be
downloaded here

http://www.moriartytribunal.ie/asp/index.asp?
ObjectID=636&Mode=0&RecordID=399
OBrien, who Forbes recently featured in a video,
has reacted harshly to the allegations.
I have no doubt whatsoever that when this report
is reviewed by a proper legal authority with
appropriate accountability, that none of the
expressions of opinion which form the basis of the
Tribunals report will withstand any objective
scrutiny, he stated in one of three letters hes
posted in the past two days in response to the
allegations.

The telecom tycoon, who owns a stake in media


company Independent News & Media, has been
fighting the tribunal for many months. In July
2009, he created his own website,
http://www.moriartytribunal.com, to help explain
and expose the inner workings of the Moriarty
Tribunal of Inquiry, which was founded in
September 1997 apparently to look into alleged
payments to government officials Lowry and
Charles J. Haughey (who is now deceased). At top of
OBriens site, it has bars that constantly update the
total costs of the tribunal (supposedly more than
227 million pounds as of Wednesday afternoon);
also on the site are his letters responding to the
accusations.
ngIf:initialized&&activeendngIf:initialized&&
active
Well respected and worth an estimated $4.2 billion,
OBrien has much to fight for. The former horse pill
salesman has built up a telecom empire with 10.75
million subscribers. His Digicel Group now operates
in dozens of Caribbean islands, Honduras, Haiti,
Fiji, Tonga and Papua New Guinea. He endears his
firm to masses by cutting prices, donating to local
causes. He also has played a role in Haitis
restoration recently funding the restoration of
Hatitis century-old Iron Market with $12 million of
his own money. The son of a human rights activist,
the billionaire also created a nonprofit Front Line to
fly activists out of dangerous spots.

MR Justice Michael Moriarty


launched a counter-attack against his
accusers yesterday and reprimanded

Denis O'Brien and the businessman's


public relations adviser.
19/03/2010

The chairman of the tribunal investigating payments to


politicians named Mr O'Brien's PR consultant James
Morrissey in the public hearing.
Mr Justice Moriarty also revealed that Mr O'Brien had
accused him of conducting the tribunal in a "totally
biased" manner, adding it had "really reached a new low in
Irish judicial history". Mr Justice Moriarty said the attack
on his handling of the tribunal was contained in a personal
letter written to him by Mr O'Brien.
"I am not going to be distracted by the prevalence of spin,
and other controversies," said Mr Justice Moriarty. "That
would not be welcomed by the courts." The chairman
referred to Mr Morrissey in the context of Mr O'Brien's
public relations campaign and said he was "bemused" by
some of the remarks about the tribunal. "I am bemused by
remarks that the tribunal was seeking to cobble together a
report to condemn people on flimsy evidence," said Mr
Justice Moriarty.
"I have been a judge for just a few weeks short of 23
years," he said, "and in that period handled cases, civil and
criminal, on evidence, not hearsay."
Injustice
Mr Justice Moriarty said his second report would be based
on evidence he had assessed.
"Not to do so would be a major injustice," he said.
The chairman said that in his time as a judge he hoped he
was humble enough to correct any error he had made and
that two witnesses would address important matters later.
After lunch, counsel for the tribunal apologised for not
circulating documents earlier relating to witnesses
scheduled to appear.
Following the apology, Mr O'Brien's legal team told the

chairman that none of them had been aware of the letter


that Mr O'Brien had written to him last year. It was an
extraordinary day at the tribunal, which has been running
for almost 13 years, and the chairman appears anxious to
make a speedy delivery of his final report. Mr Justice
Moriarty made it clear that he would be spelling out the
reasons for the delays in his second report.
Denis McFadden, a barrister who advises the Attorney
General, gave evidence to support advice given by senior
counsel Richard Nesbitt in 1996.
Mr Nesbitt advised that a change of ownership to include
Dermot Desmond's IIU company as investors would not
affect the legality of the licensing process. Counsel for the
tribunal described Mr Nesbitt's evidence last year as "not
credible"

THE MAHON AND MORIARTY


TRIBUNAL REPORTS HOW WAS
IT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN: WHY
DID NO ONE SHOUT STOP?
THE MAHON AND MORIARTY TRIBUNAL REPORTS HOW WAS IT
ALLOWED TO HAPPEN: WHY DID NO ONE SHOUT STOP?
Michael Smith, Editor, Village Magazine, former Chair of An Taisce
Summary

Shouting stop was difficult.


For historical and cultural reasons we in Ireland are too focused on the
short-term and not very good with rules.
The same anti-regulation, anti-planning syndrome that caused the
tribunals and bad planning caused the property bubble and the banking
excesses.
We dont hear enough about the common good, even now.
Implementation of the recommendations of Moriarty and Mahon is
patchy.
The government is pursuing progressive legislation on whistle blowing
and lobbying.
It is not clear if the proposed Planning Regulator will have teeth.
We still have bad planning.
Civil service maladministration facilitated securing of the mobile
licence for Denis OBriens ESAT.
The Mahon Tribunal conclusions focused on easy targets, especially
retired politicians, and simply failed to report on much of the evidence it
heard, especially if it was not corroborated by Frank Dunlop.
Much of what happened at the tribunals could happen again. An
Taoiseach hasnt yet even accepted the Moriarty findings. Policy is
focused on short-term economics to the detriment of long-term social
and environmental goals. Governmental attitudes to bogs, septic tanks
and climate change are scandalous.
Too many white-collar criminals get away with it because the
prosecuting agencies are geared primarily to deal with shoplifters, not
white-collar criminals.
WHY NO-ONE SHOUTED STOP
MY EXPERIENCE
Upon reflection I thought my own experience over the last twenty years
would be of interest because I think I did associate with people who did
see what was going on and try to shout stop albeit ineffectually and
usually humiliatingly.
I remember Bertie Ahern, on the couple of occasions I met him, used to
look at me crookedly and asked if I was still battlin away.
Battlin was difficult and unpleasant and no-one really wanted to know
to share the joke. In fact the joke seemed to be on you. For example,
an early effort was when I published a leaflet in the name of CHIP in
1991 called Politicans on the fiddle: vote them out.
That was some time before Judge Mahon recognized corruption was
endemic and systemic at every political level. We published leaflets
outlining how councillors were dodgily changing their minds on
rezonings, asking people to call them about it.
In 1995 I was involved with an initiative to offer a reward for planning
corruption that led to the Mahon Tribunal.
I transferred the contents of the PD skip with all their financial records to
the Sunday Business Post, and indeed later on I also transferred Liam

Lawlors tax return to the Sunday Business Post. I presented a Worse


Ireland award to AIB in 1995 while they were presenting the Better
Ireland award in the next room. I unsuccessfully appealed Michael
Lowrys Dunnes-funded extension in 1997, and successfully appealed
Mary McAleeses holiday home. I tried to crucify Treasury Holdings in
the courts in 1997 because they were flouting European law and
planning norms, and buccaneering over the City of Dublin including
rigging auctions and threatening to run people out of town. I made a
complaint to the Standards in Public Office Commission about Seanie
Fitzpatricks Docklands conflicts of interest when he was still lording it
around town in 1997, which led him to say he was the victim of media
McCarthyism. It was found against me on a technicality. I put my name
to over 1,000 objections to rubbish developments up and down the
country including much one-off housing. Often Id meet them, clever
architects in black polo necks, attractive young couples, businessmen
who towards the end of the boom always somehow wanted to give
something back. Nearly always the development would be shocking.
Apart ironically from Docklands in Dublin, Ireland didnt really DO good,
sustainable development. I tried to get the Meath County Development
Plan struck down in the High Court for allowing sprawl of Dublin. I was
involved with an initiative that organized someone to fly around the Bord
Pleanla Chamber and exit by the window when it was considering the
mad Terminal Two Dublin Airport extension. I even once had Dick
Roche trailed by someone dressed up as a two-sided cockroach Dick
Roche: Cock Roche. But it didnt really do me or anyone else much
good. Because culture trumps everything else and we were as a
country deliberately, even professionally, in rape mode.
I was there for the early nineties corruption. Frank Dunlop once read the
Irish Times ostentatiously in my face while I delivered myself, in
opposition to his clients at a Bord Pleanla hearing. Nasty.
And I was in Conways on Parnell St more than twenty years ago when
councillors from Dublin County Council used to retire for a few pints with
Frank Dunlop and a couple of brown envelopes or bags.
Indeed I once had the pleasure of addressing the FF group on the old
corrupt county council one evening in Conways pub in 1991 on the
subject of good planning in the county. I banged on about how the socalled new towns Tallaght, Blanchardstown and Lucan-Clondalkin
should be finished before the County looked at starting major new
suburbs, while the Fianna Filers scoffed mariettas and chattered away,
like in a crche, really. After Id droned on worthily for ten minutes
about the common good, the ERDO report and reinforcing the city
centre while councillors shouted among themselves and yawned,
Councillor Betty Coffey intervened to announce that her party
colleagues got my drift and I was ushered out still shouting about the
ERDO report.
In 1991, I attended a meeting about the Carrickmines Valley. At the end

of the meeting, on its periphery, I encountered Betty Coffey who was a


leading councillor for Fianna Fil. I had a pleasant if dull chat with her
about zoning, though I think she was mainly interested in how
suspiciously young I was, and then she said I should talk to Fianna
Fils planning expert. She beckoned to the shadows. Liam Lawlor
emerged and urbanely said he was not in favour of rezoning the valley
and had voted against the wholesale rezoning of the valley. The strange
thing was that he was not on the Council at the time, having lost his
seat in the local election, and he had no obvious reason to be at an
obscure meeting in the distant southern suburbs. He seemed
nevertheless to be fulfilling some sort of a role politically. Fifteen years
later it emerged FFs planning expert had a financial involvement in the
controversial Jackson Way site in the Carrickimines Valley over which
Dunlop was jailed and several councillors have been charged, though
certainly he declared no such interests to me when I spoke to him that
day so long ago in a foreign land. Thats how it was done.
On another occasion when I was campaigning against rezoning of the
Carrickmines valley/Cherrywood, I had a row with Councillor Olivia
Mitchell who claimed we were engineering a great many telephone calls
to her. We were indeed promoting late-night calls as that seemed to be
the only time that hard-working councillors could be reached.
Immediately after the vote, in the Council office, I caught her hugging
one of the developers whose scheme she changed her mind to
support. I said oh, Kissy, Kissy with one of the developers and she
said Lucky you dont have a camera. I sort of felt that councillors
should not be so passionate about the interests of developers.
Subsequently it emerged shed taken money from the developers
before changing her mind. Twenty years later FG has forgiven her,
though Mahon said her voting was inappropriate.
I spent a year of my life way back then campaigning against what the
Mahon Tribunal in the end accepted was the corrupt rezoning of the
Carrickmines Valley, primarily for Monarch Properties. We had leaflets
and banners, and were like flying columns countering Monarchs
expensive propaganda. The developers there spent 800,000 on their
campaign, much of it on Frank Dunlop and his largesse. Every time we
moved theyd attack us and vice versa.
Local residents went through all the democratic process, and through
sheer force of money they lost to forces they could not affect. When
we lost we were distraught. We lost a corrupt vote. We tried everything
but it was clear we needed to go beyond the usual process to blow up
the system of worthy letters to Ministers, ignored following unfulfilled
promises to revert. We offered a reward for information about planning
corruption.
We Colm Mac Eochaidh and I had to do it through a Newry solicitor
as we wanted to remain anonymous and no solicitors down here would
touch it. Eventually we had a flow of information. Some of it was

rubbish where Shergar was allegedly buried but some of it clearly


was not, which we drip fed to journalists, led by Frank Connolly. James
Gogarty came to us with allegations about paying money to Ray Burke,
the then Minister for Foreign Affairs. Gogarty didnt want to talk to the
press because he felt humiliated by his dealings with the Irish Times. He
was obsessed with his pension, very dull really, and we had to persuade
him that in order to embarrass his employer about how his pension had
been treated he had to tell his whole story of corruption to the press.
That was a battle.
Anyway the drip feed week after week, during the silly season of
summer 1995, corroded the body politic, which in the end panicked.
Ray Burke resigned because the allegations were true. The planning
tribunal was instigated to look into the allegations and in the end I
suppose it led to Berties resignation too. Though it cost far too much
probably 200-250m. And its done nothing to stop dodgy planning. And
if you check out Cherrywood now on the Bray dual-carriageway, the
once happy valley is now a moonscape.
Some years later I became chairman of An Taisce which purported to
take the public interest stance in planning matters. What I discovered
was that, then and now, democratically driven local authority
development plans and national plans such as the spatial strategy,
created by politicians, were essays in hypocrisy as they were totally
flouted by councillors acting as private representatives as opposed to
public representatives to vested interests of all sorts; from larger
developers to one-off house builders. If you owned property and
shouted loud enough you could get councillors to lean on officials to get
what you wanted in the frenzy of short-termist greed that was our own
tiger. For example, Spencer Dock, the Carlton site on OConnell St, the
childrens hospital, and Liberty Hall got permission or approval from the
local authority even though the democratically-agreed development plan
did not allow them. Development plan policy is usually against one-off
housing even though in many counties sixty or seventy percent of
housing is built that way. But officials did what they were told by
developers. It was shout power for developers big and small in the
face of any vision of a planned common good, in the face of
democratically-agreed policy, in the face of democracy, in the face of
policy.
And An Taisce, which just championed the idea of following plans, of
denser communities, especially in towns outside of Dublin so Dublin
would not sprawl, got hammered and called the Ku Klux Klan. Which
was funny for the first few years and until you look at the legacy of
nothing youd want really. No new parks, playgrounds, imaginative civic
spaces and new places to go, no bold new suburbs showing we could
do what they did in Scandinavia but, since we had more money, better.
Instead we have a legacy of what youd expect if Bertie had planned
and built it himself.

Next Im going to look at History and how it has led to our distorted
sense of the common good; and whos getting in the way now.
Thirdly, Ill briefly look at the recommendations of Moriarty and Mahon,
whether theyre being implemented and who isnt being prosecuted.
WHY DID IT HAPPEN?IRELANDS HISTORY ACCOUNTS FOR
CORRUPTION
Our history is of Colonisation leading, among other things, to rulebreaking and demonisation of whistleblowers; famine leading to lack of
interest in the long-term, lack of interest in the environment and a view
that planning is a luxury; the inflation of the role of the big man from
Haughey through Ahern to Lowry; an obsession with Civil War politics
and then the North to the detriment of vision or public interest, on who
ruled not how they ruled; an interest in culture and the imagination to
the detriment of the truth in politics; Catholic notions of sin and
redemption meaning venality was literally forgivable; and the elevation
of sins of sexuality to the downgrading of sins of avarice or against the
common good. So to be trite the problem is History: that is to say
famine, colony, and church.
Anyway, maybe thats why it was allowed to happen.
WHAT HAPPENED, WHO ALLOWED IT, WHO PROMOTED IT AND
WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW?
So what happened? We need to agree what happened? Because I
think what generated Mahon and Moriarty generated our wider collapse,
including economic collapse in the end; all part of the Ireland syndrome
generated by our generation.
I think that our generation in Ireland generated a once-in-a-century
boom and allowed it to be hijacked by the corrupt and the greedy
pursuing no particular vision, with no regard for the long-term. Our
political classes offered no attractive vision of society and did not see
the downturn coming. Fianna Fil ruled the boom on dodginess, shorttermism and neo-liberalism dressed up as socialism. Driven by their
own bloated lifestyles, they behaved as if money was all that mattered,
there was little need for regulation or planning and there would never be
a tomorrow. Opposition parties did not do their job of skeptically
assessing our tax base, our banks and our property sector. Our political
parties evolved into interchangeability, increased the inequality gaps in
Irish society and lost any sense of ideology or vision so that even the
Labour Party supported income tax cuts, and even the Green Party
manifested the preference for rhetoric over action that had always
characterised their unlikely political brethren in Fianna Fil.
WHO ALLOWED IT?
And who allowed it to happen? Politicians, including people whom
history seems likely to judge as beyond reproach, like Garret Fitzgerald,
and grandees like Derry Hussey, the gardai, the media, regulators of all
sorts from the planning authorities to the banking regulator to the civil
servants who worked on the ESAT fourth mobile-phone licence.

WHO PROMOTED IT?


And the people who promoted it, rather than merely allowing it, were
the sort of people who control FF and FG, the classes that tolerated
Haughey and Lowry and still tolerate dodgy councillors who serve the
private interest, the sort of people who have tax-driven investments or
who might flog a one-off house even though they got permission only
for family use, who lost the run of themselves in the boom. Think Quinn
Family.
But the electorate of course let itself down by ever voting for Haughey,
and in the case of Bertie at least by giving him his third term, though
actually he never had enough vision or ideology to be appropriate as
Taoiseach. There will be lots of people here who championed Haughey
and Bertie.
A note on the programme for today outlines a reasonable analysis of
our problems and possible solutions, but then announces that these
matters will be debated by government ministers, members of the
opposition, heads of industry, economists, political analysts and
journalists. We shouldnt carry on the discourse as if this society
hasnt failed.
WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW?
But the point really is that most of all it could happen again, is
happening again, because the culture passed down to us by history
hasnt changed. Admittedly the omerta surrounding Haugheys wealth
wouldnt survive these days, and Liam Lawlor would not be appointed to
vice-chair of the Dil ethics committee. But look at the culture of the
Quinn Family, at the impunity of Seanie Fitz, the Bailey Brothers, Bertie
and Ben Dunne, at the focus on the economy to the detriment of the
social side and the environmental side, at judicial appointments, the
indulgence of Denis OBrien and Michael Lowry, that the Taoiseach
hasnt yet accepted the Moriarty findings, at the quality of planning
decisions, the treatment of bogs and septic tanks. Bertie Ahern batting
for the Star from behind the contents of a refrigerator and Celia Larkin
pontificating on the issues of the day in the Sunday Independent, there
is an overwhelming mainstream lack of interest in growing inequality.
The national discourse is erratic and unanalytical as evidenced by the
antipathy to property taxes. And if they cant even get these things right,
what chance is there theyll deal with climate change?
Nobody left or right really cares about vision and too many want to go
back to the way things were in the boom. Nobody really believes in the
public interest.
COMMON GOOD
I want to talk a little about the common good. Now it seems to me that
we could agree that the common good involves promoting competent
people who are not obsessed with themselves and who are
economically literate; eradicating nepotism and corruption; encouraging
equality of opportunity and sustainability with due regard to the

disadvantaged and the future. Now who could disagree with that?
Practically, the answer is for citizens to be educated, starting in school,
to choose leaders at every level not in their own interests but in those of
the society they wish for.
THE TRIBUNALS
MORIARTY: MEDIA FAILED TO FOCUS ON CIVIL SERVICE
Focusing on OBrien and Lowry, the media missed much of Moriarty but
in fact I think much of what happened was due to the civil service.
Perhaps because Moriarty had to re-write a small section of his report
after an earlier draft was apparently unsustainably critical of civil
servants, the media also downplayed the extraordinary findings on how
senior civil servants in the then Department of Communications handled
the tendering process.
Its Secretary General was not concerned by Lowrys failure to keep the
normal distance from OBrien: the Tribunal effectively rejected most of
the Secretary Generals account on this, referring at times to his
evidence as bizarre, without foundation in fact and not reliable.
In the first Moriarty report in 1997 Judge Moriarty also refused to accept
this gentlemans evidence about his time as head of the Department of
Energy relating to Glen Ding Woods in Co Wicklow.
I would say one of the ways Moriarty arose was because of negligent
public servants, with a pro-Ministerial deference and a fetish for
dynamic businessmen.
MAHON: FOCUSED ON EASY TARGETS
It was never really reasonable to rely on the sort of minds that took 15
years and up to 300m to deal with an urgent examination of
corruption in one county to then produce a radical and dynamic report.
The Mahon Report nails easy targets among the rezoners: four dead
dinosaurs (three FF, one FG), five red-toothed, long-sidelined rezoning
machines (three FF and two FG) and, well, Olivia Mitchell (Olivia was
done for inappropriate behaviour in one case only).
But in the rezoning that I was opposing 20 years ago Cherrywood
near Cabinteely in Co Dublin as with most of the rezonings, the
findings fall short of implicating anyone who still could be described as
the political establishment, though certainly it nails the corrupt
developers behind the scheme and dodgy Frank Dunlop.
In 1993 the residents group I was involved with published a leaflet
wondering why local councillors, who voted for Cherrywood in 1993,
consigning the beauty-spot to concrete, had voted against it in 1992,
with no change of circumstances. Six of them.
We said changing their minds was suspicious in 1993. That was before
we knew that 60 politicians and community groups took money from the
developer, Monarch Properties, which disbursed 167,000 in cheques
and 161,000 in untraced cash. This was before several councillors
were charged with corruption concerning the adjoining Jackson Way
site. Before Frank Dunlop (jailed over Jackson Way) who had taken

over lobbying for the Cherrywood rezoning in late 1992, confessed


himself a crook. Before we knew that Albert Reynolds had received a
5,000 donation that referred to the positive role of FF councillors in
facilitating the rezoning. And before it was known John Bruton received
2,500 from Monarch for Fine Gael in between the crucial votes. Nine
out of the 12 FG councillors who would talk to their partys internal
Inquiry in 2000 had received money from Monarch or Frank Dunlop (or
both) in the 1991-1993 period when I was concerned with the
Cherrywood vote. The tribunal didnt even attempt to ask the councillors
why they changed their minds after receiving donations from Dunlop or
Monarch, though that didnt stop it hauling them in and asking them
endless other questions. The report almost entirely omits conclusions
on this endless stream of dodgy evidence. Someone needs to do a
survey on what percentage of the evidence heard by the tribunal was
never resolved by it at all.
And we heard nothing about life beyond the Red Cow, though Phil
Hogans civil servants implausibly seem to think weve no reason for
concern, less still investigation.
TRIBUNALS:
RECOMMENDATIONS AND
POTENTIAL FOR
PROSECUTIONS
I want to turn to the outcome of the tribunals: recommendations and
prosecutions.
Moriarty RecommendationsThe Government has argued some of
the major recommendations of Moriarty have been addressed,
including reducing corporate donations, publishing draft
whistleblower legislation, and starting the process to regulate
lobbyists. The independence of the Revenue Commissioners has
been placed on a statutory basis, the leaders allowance regulated
and the Central Banks regulatory powers have been enhanced.
Of the Moriarty recommendations it is fair to say government is not
going as far as it wanted on donations to political parties.
Mahon recommendationsAlmost half of the 64 recommendations
made by the tribunal have already, the government claims, been
implemented or are in the process of being implemented. 29 of the
64 recommendations made by the tribunal had been implemented,
14 would be implemented and 18 recommendations remained
under consideration. The tribunal rightly recommends that both
the National Development Plan and the National Spatial Strategy
be placed on a statutory footing. It is not clear if this has been
accepted by government or indeed what it means (statutes can be
aspirational); or whether Regional Authorities will be directly
elected and held accountable for implementation of RPGs which
they currently flout on the grandest scale imaginable. Government
is running with the recommendation that where the elected
members disagree with the advice of the professional planners
and intend to issue a direction to the Manager to grant planning

permission, they should be required to state their reasons for


doing so. In addition, Mahon recommended that both that advice
and those reasons should be sent to An Bord Pleanla which
should have the power to veto that direction. The Department and
media seem to have lost sight of that recommendation which
seems to me to be crucial. The tribunal recommends that the
Minister for the Environments ability to give directions to Regional
Authorities and Local Planning Authorities should be entrusted to
a Planning Regulator. Worryingly Jan OSullivan is to consult the
Dil committee which will probably be loth to facilitate
independent intervention in county councils planning decisions.
Will there be a role for An Bord Pleanla, the Ombudsman or a
completely new independent office? What are the limits of the
regulators powers vis--vis the planning process and elected
members? A number of recommendations relating to conflicts of
interest have not been adopted by the government, which says
they are under consideration.
It is good the Department is currently developing draft heads of a Bill on
lobbying.
The introduction of comprehensive whistleblower protection legislation
has got as far as publication of draft heads of the protected disclosures
in the public interest Bill earlier this year, and the draft is very
encouraging.
On ethics, more excitingly Brendan Howlin said he had decided to
engage in a full review of how the existing legislative framework for
ethics could be reformed. This would develop a single, comprehensive
and overarching framework grounded on a clear and comprehensive
set of principles. This considerable undertaking would cross all
departments and sectors.
PROSECUTIONS
Prosecutions of tribunal villains have been very disappointing, due
primarily to problems in the culture and funding of law enforcement
agencies including the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the
Competition Authority, the Criminal Assets Bureau, and the Garda
Fraud Squad.
The only convictions related to the drawn-out tribunals have been of
Ray Burke for tax evasion, George Redmond (eventually overturned)
and Frank Dunlop for corruption, and Liam Cosgrave for offences under
the ethics acts; as well as of Liam Lawlor for blatant obstruction of the
Planning Tribunal. More are needed.
SO IN SYNOPSIS
For cultural reasons were too focused on the short-term and not very
good with rules. We dont hear enough about the common good, even
now. Implementation of the recommendations of Moriarty and Mahon is
patchy. We still have bad planning. Much of what happened at the
tribunals could happen again. Too many white-collar criminals get away

with it because the prosecuting agencies are geared primarily to deal


with shoplifters, not white-collar criminals.

O'Brien's links to Fine


Gael spell more trouble
for the Taoiseach
01/04/2012

the report found that former Fine Gael minister Michael


Lowry "delivered" the state mobile phone licence to the
consortium led by the business tycoon Denis O'Brien, who
in turn made payments to Lowry.
Enda Kenny embraced the public mood of consternation
and dramatically promised that he would not let the
Moriarty tribunal's report gather dust. So he duly sent it
off to the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Garda
Commissioner, who gave it to the Criminal Assets Bureau,
which examined it and reported back to the Garda
Commissioner, who passed the report over to the Director
of Public Prosecutions, where it currently resides.
While the authorities deliberated, Lowry, these days a
poll-topping independent TD, continued his local
campaigns on health, crime and anti-social behaviour, as
O'Brien became ever more successful, got to meet the
Queen and was a guest of the Taoiseach at the global
economic forum.
It seemed that Moriarty was a dim and distant memory
until 10 days ago when the Mahon tribunal's report
exploded its corruption findings all over the body politic,
drowning Fianna Fail but causing a fair bit of collateral
damage to Fine Gael too.
Not least, because Mahon resurrected the ghost of
Moriarty. Throw in an ill-judged photograph of Enda
Kenny sharing a platform with Denis O'Brien at the New

York Stock Exchange in the same week Mahon was


published and the Moriarty tribunal was truly back to
haunt Fine Gael.
Kenny was accused of failing to act robustly on Moriarty
and donations from O'Brien's mobile phone company to
Fine Gael were reprised. At first, Kenny's critics were
members of the opposition, principally Fianna Failers
hoping to deflect their own shame. When Kenny's
government colleagues filed out against him, he knew he
had a problem.
First Lucinda Creighton, the junior minister for Europe,
said she hoped Denis O'Brien wouldn't be invited to any
more economic events "because of the findings of the
Moriarty tribunal".
Two days later, Joan Burton, the Labour Minister for
Social Protection, under Dail privilege, named O'Brien in
the same breath as former Italian prime minister Silvio
Berlusconi and highlighted the public and political unease
about him continually popping up at public events and
called on the Government to "reflect on how it should in
future interact with people against whom adverse findings
have been made by tribunals".
The day after that, her Labour colleague, Brendan Howlin,
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, backed her
up: "The Government has to make its decisions in relation
to any individual against whom adverse findings are made
by a tribunal established by this House."
The concerns about Fine Gael's proximity to Denis O'Brien
raised other questions last week too: such as why no action
has yet been taken against a former government minister
whom a High Court judge found received "payments" from
a business tycoon to whom he "delivered" a mobile phone
licence?
It's been a year since the Garda Commissioner Martin
Callinan asked the Criminal Assets Bureau to examine the
Moriarty report for potential criminality. The huge tome
landed on the desk of Eugene Corcoran, the chief
superintendent at the Criminal Assets Bureau last March.

His brief was to examine the report for suspected crimes


and tax misdemeanours. Ten CAB officers were assigned
to comb through the report. They expected to be finished
in weeks but instead it took them months to trawl through
the myriad financial transactions.
They eventually presented a report outlining the suspected
or potential criminality
they had identified and gave it to the Garda Commissioner
late last year.
But there were complex legal issues; the DPP, Claire
Loftus, was called on late last year for advice and her office
is still deliberating on whether there are grounds to launch
a full investigation into Lowry's finances.
It is thought that the length of time that has elapsed is
among the primary legal issues under consideration.
Almost 17 years has passed since the events outlined in the
Moriarty tribunal's report. Since then witnesses have died,
records may have been destroyed and memories have
lapsed.
If an investigation does proceed, gardai will have to gather
evidence from scratch. The law prevents them from using
the Moriarty tribunal's report as anything other than a
road-map. That will mean re-interviewing hundreds of
witnesses and sourcing bank records and other documents
related to the money trail followed by the tribunal.
Those transactions include 150,000 that went from
O'Brien to Fine Gael fundraiser David Austin, who paid
147,000 to Michael Lowry; there was stg300,000
lodged with Lowry's UK solicitor on his behalf; and a
stg420,000 loan through Woodchester Bank as a
"Dennis O'Brien transaction" that was later reversed.
Despite unearthing this money trail, it found that "no
conclusions can be arrived at, other than that repeated and
clandestine courses of action were adopted by persons
intimately associated with Mr O'Brien, to confer payments
or other benefits upon Mr Lowry on behalf of Mr O'Brien".
The sole finding of corruption in the entire report related
to an attempt by Lowry to effect a rent increase for the

then supermarket tycoon, Ben Dunne. The rent increase


never happened.
Lowry has challenged the State to investigate him,
claiming that the authorities would find no trace of the
900,000 the tribunal found he received -- directly or
indirectly -- from O'Brien.
The Criminal Assets Bureau was set up to follow money
trails and its extensive powers are more far reaching than
tribunals of inquiry. All CAB requires to launch an
investigation is a "reasonable suspicion" that assets are the
proceeds of criminal conduct. It can seek court orders to
search solicitors' offices, accountants' offices, financial
institutions, can freeze bank accounts and seize property.
It can apply to the High Court to confiscate wealth from
those who are suspected -- not convicted -- of benefiting
from "unjust enrichment". Based on the suspicions of a
chief superintendent, a judge can make a "corrupt
enrichment order" to force that person to make a payment
to the State. Unlike the Moriarty tribunal, it also has the
powers to question witnesses from outside the
jurisdiction.
O'Brien, while harshly criticised in the Moriarty tribunal
report, has not been found guilty of anything, as his lawyer
pointed out last week. He contests the tribunal's findings.
Yet as the man who the tribunal said was the source of
payments to Lowry, it's hard to see how he would escape
being drawn into a possible CAB probe of Lowry's affairs.
O'Brien has been widely praised for using his significant
influence to promote Irish investment abroad. And there
lies Enda Kenny's conundrum with O'Brien.
The same Lucinda Creighton who believes the tycoon
should be removed from future government guest lists
nailed it last week when she mused: "Denis O'Brien's role
in his engagement with Bill Clinton in particular and with
the Irish diaspora and potential investors is an important
one, and I don't know that at a time like this that we afford
to turn our back on it."
It's what the tribunals have been telling us all along: it's all

about money.
The findings of the CSO study are not a surprise and
underline the deficiencies already revealed in another
report from the office last year and an examination carried
out by the Garda Inspectorate two years earlier.
In the meantime, the garda authorities and the
Department of Justice have taken some preliminary stopgap action while they await the promised overhaul of the
outdated IT tools available to the force.
These temporary measures have brought about some
improvements, which in theory should allow officers to
track inquiries into a recorded crime and check on the
progress made in the investigation.
Prior to those changes, which were introduced in the past
year, crimes were simply marked as "under investigation"
and it was extremely difficult to determine the status of
those inquiries.
The CSO acknowledged yesterday that the level of nonrecording and wrong classification of crimes had improved
"slightly" since the audit report, published last year but
relating to the 2011 crime figures.
However, the extent of the problems, which still exist,
remains extremely worrying, with an average of almost
one one in five reported crimes not recorded on Pulse and
the figure increasing to more than 17pc in some areas.
New crimes are meant to be recorded on the computer
system on the day they have been reported but the CSO
found that some were not keyed into Pulse for up to a
week, while others were wrongly classified or were lacking
in detail to allow the category to be determined.
A significant portion of these flaws can be attributed to the
failure to provide the garda in some districts with even
the basic computer equipment to input the information
quickly into the database and they are left relying on paper
and pen to make the initial report.
A raft of recommendations were put forward three years
ago on how to eliminate many of the errors and update the
system and these were all readily accepted by the garda

and the then government. But it was acknowledged that a


huge financial investment was needed if the force,
technologically, was to be brought into the 21st Century.
Last year the head of the Garda Inspectorate Bob Olson
described Pulse as 1990s technology and said it was time
for the system to be put into retirement and the garda
provided with "an entirely new platform".
Tnaiste and Justice Minister Frances Fitzgerald has
allocated 205m in the capital plan for 2016-2021 to
upgrade the classification of crime and recording of
detections to required standards, but the distribution of
that money must now be fast-forwarded to ensure that the
current litany of flaws are eliminated within a shorter time
frame.
In the meantime, these findings should not be allowed to
detract from the CSO's other publication yesterday
showing that 10 of the 15 crime categories recorded a
decrease in the past year, with burglaries down by more
than 26pc in the year ending June, while robberies, theft
and gun crime fell significantly.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analy
sis/maeve-sheehan-obriens-links-to-finegael-spell-more-trouble-for-thetaoiseach-26838745.html

This concludes the AGM of NOT Independent News & Media James
Osborne, former chairman of Independent News and Media
(IN&M), who was voted out of office on 8th June 2012

The evidence of the insidious progress of businessman Denis

OBrien in influencing, coercing and suppressing Irelands media


grows with every passing week. On Wednesday last, Vincent
Browne claimed that journalist Sam Smyth has been ostracised at
the Independent News and Media group, where he was a regular
writer for the Independent, whose editor is Gerry ORegan, and
Sams last report was at the end of May 2012 hes been
apparently sidelined since then, according to Vincent.
Sam Smyth was previously the subject of a cack-handed demand by
Denis OBriens associate Leslie Buckley to the former CEO of IN&M
who wanted Sam removed from reporting on the Moriarty Tribunal,
the tribunal which ultimately reached adverse findings in relation
to Denis OBrien in the award of a mobile phone license in 1995.
The broadsheet.ie website has published former IN&M CEO Gavin
OReillys record of the incident. Sam subsequently lost his job on
Today FM, a radio station owned by Denis OBriens Communicorp.
Today in the Sunday Independent, in what appears to be brave
defiance by editor Anne Harris, there is an interview with former
IN&M chairman, James Osborne, there are stark claims that Denis
OBrien sought to suppress an article which was eventually (see
below) published on 15th April, 2012. The article available here
detailed Anglo Irish Banks largest borrowers as at March 2009, of
which Denis was one. The article said
Denis OBrien, the telecoms entrepreneur, is listed as owing Anglo
Irish Bank 833.8m on foot of personal and corporate loans just
after the bank was nationalised in 2009, making him its then sixth
largest borrower. Mr OBrien has over the past three years reduced
his borrowings to under 500m using cash generated by his
Caribbean and Pacific-based mobile phone empire. The article
continues but it is indeed innocuous stuff.
Today James Osborne is quoted as saying As you know as you
wrote in your paper on April 7, which was a Saturday, at about one
oclock I got a call from Denis then he said theyve been on to
me, theres an article in tomorrows paper and I want it withdrawn
and I said Im sorry, not me. Im an independent non-executive
chairman and Im not doing that, Im not going to interfere in an
editorial, and we had an argument about it.I mean could you
imagine if I had rung you [Anne Harris] up, at that stage I had only
met you at your husbands funeral, and said: Hello, Im your
chairman, you must be thrilled to get this call on a Saturday
afternoon Theres an article about Denis OBrien which was
about the 13 biggest borrowers in Anglo, I want it out. Actually the
article was innocuous, there was nothing in it.
It seems that James got the call from Denis on 7th April, 2012
which was a Saturday and it seems the Anglo Top 13 borrowers
story was to appear in the Sunday Independent the following day
which was Sunday 8th April, 2012. In fact, the story didnt appear
until the following week, the 15th April, 2012, which is odd and

might suggest questions as to whether the story due for publication


on 8th was modified before its actual publication on 15th. Anne
Harris did refer to this incident in an article on 17th June, 2012, but
the full details couldnt emerge until James Osborne could talk
freely about the matter.
So now we have at least two credible claims of Denis OBrien
seeking to suppress reporting in Irelands biggest print media
group, a group in which he now owns 30% of the shares and has
substantial control over the board. It seems that the second
attempt at editorial interference is denied by a representative of
Denis OBrien, in response to which James Osborne today says and
I know Deniss representative or whoever has denied that the
call took place, but if he denies that the call took place that is a
straight forward lie
The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland recently bizarrely
concluded that Mr. OBriens interests in Independent News and
Media (IN&M) are relevant to the Authority in the context of its
statutory obligation to consider the desirability of allowing any
person, or group of persons, to have control of, or substantial
interests in, an undue amount of communications media in an
area. In this regard, the Authority was obliged to consider the
changes in Mr. OBriens interests in IN&M to determine whether the
changes amounted to substantial interest or control as those
terms are defined in the Policy. At its meeting on 23rd July 2012 the
Authority determined that Mr. OBrien does not control IN&M.
Rather he has a substantial interest in the Company, as that term is
defined in the Policy. In this regard, the Authority was not obliged
to review Mr. OBriens interests in the context of an undue amount
of communications media.
The nine members of the Authority are Bob Collins (Chairperson),
Larry Bass, Paula Downey, Professor Colum Kenny, Michelle Mc
Shortall, Dr Maria Moloney, Michael Moriarty, Siobhn N Ghadhra
and John Waters.
It is high time that the Authority was summoned before an
Oireachtas committee presumably the Joint Committee on
Transport and Communications to justify itself.

But when Gavin O'Reilly resigned as chief executive of


INM in April, it marked the end of his family's longstanding involvement in the newspaper group. Investors
hoped his departure would also spell the end of the
hostilities that divided the board since the telecoms
tycoon, Denis O'Brien, began building up his 29.9 per cent
stake in the business.
But there was one last fight that culminated in a dramatic
corporate bloodletting at the company's AGM on Friday.
The row was about O'Reilly's 1.87m exit package. A
majority of INM's board had approved it but one of
O'Brien's representatives on the board, Paul Connolly,
challenged it in the High Court, claiming it was excessive,
undeserved and unlawful. When the rest of the board
recommended that Connolly should be voted off for suing
his own company, O'Brien hit back. Connolly's court
challenge opened on Wednesday but was quickly eclipsed
by blood on the floor at INM's headquarters in City West.
James Osborne, who as chairman of INM defended
O'Reilly's deal on Thursday, was off the board on Friday,
voted out by O'Brien. So too was Donal Buggy, the chief
financial officer. Other board members had already bowed
out before the AGM: Baroness Margaret Jay, a former
speaker of the House of Lords; Bengt Braun, who heads a
Scandinavian media firm; and Lothar Lanz, a German
business executive, stepped down in advance of the AGM.
The remaining five-strong board includes two O'Brien

representatives, Lucy Gaffney and Paul Connolly, and


Vincent Crowley, who replaced Gavin O'Reilly as CEO.
O'Brien, having made clear who now calls the shots, said
in a statement afterwards that "lack of leadership has cost
the company dearly over many years".
Although O'Reilly's exit package has been eclipsed by
events, last week's High Court action lifted the lid on the
boardroom tensions that have dogged the newspaper
group. The meat was in the confidential emails and board
minutes disclosed during the legal action, and which
revealed in compelling detail how the company's
worsening financial situation, spiralling animosity and the
sheer weight of opposition from Denis O'Brien, drove the
last of the O'Reillys out of INM's driving seat.
Osborne, a suave lawyer, was appointed as neutral
chairman last October to smooth things over between
warring factions on the board of INM.
The O'Reilly family, led by Sir Anthony, had long
controlled the newspaper group. O'Brien, an emerging
entrepreneur who had competed with Sir Anthony in
business, set his sights on it. He made his fortune after
winning Ireland's mobile phone licence in controversial
circumstances. The Moriarty Tribunal found that he had
funnelled hundreds of thousands of euros to Minister
Michael Lowry "in clandestine circumstances" after the
awarding of the licence. O'Brien ploughed 500m of it into
building a majority stake in the group. He nominated his
directors to the board, ramped up vociferous and public
criticisms of how the company was run. Sir Anthony
retired in 2009, and his son, Gavin, was appointed his
successor. After a tempestuous three years, a 94 per cent
fall in share price, and under fire from O'Brien and more
recent major stakeholder, Dermot Desmond (who now
owns 6.36 per cent), O'Reilly bowed to pressure and left
with a 1.87m exit package for loss of earnings, benefits
and pension.
From the outset Osborne was being petitioned about
O'Reilly's performance by certain directors -- but in

evidence last week he claimed his relationship with


O'Reilly changed around February or March this year.
By then, according to Osborne's account, he began to share
the concerns of some of the other directors. The CEO and
the chairman had discussed these concerns already but on
March 6 Osborne put them in writing.
Osborne's issues included the company's poor commercial
performance -- two profit warnings in a year, the need for
a dramatic cost reduction programme and capital; the
major shareholders wouldn't stump up fresh capital
without a change of management.
He moved on to O'Brien: "I have spoken to you a number
of times about Denis O'Brien. I realise that Denis has
made extremely hurtful comments in public concerning
both you personally and the company.
"This is unfortunate but I would suggest that there is a
huge difference in a shareholder criticising a CEO and the
CEO being critical of a shareholder," he wrote.
He also raised O'Reilly's expenses -- referred to them in
court as that "thorny" issue.
O'Reilly's family lived in London and he commuted for
work to Dublin, South Africa and Australia, where he
chaired an Australian media group. Most of O'Reilly's
salary was paid into an offshore company in Jersey. While
in Dublin he stayed in the Four Seasons but changed to an
apartment in January. He travelled business class on longhaul flights only. His expenses for one five-month period
were 120,000, including 75,000 on air travel and
16,000 on hotels, according to court documents.
In his letter to O'Reilly, Osborne wanted to know if there
were tax implications for INM over his salary
arrangement. He claimed "many directors" were of the
view that he spent too much time in London. And as a bythe-way, he mentioned that a friend of his had seen
O'Reilly in South Africa with his family; "so as to avoid any
misunderstandings, please confirm that the company
wasn't responsible for the costs of their being there".
O'Reilly covered the costs himself, according to two long

letters -- one 14 pages, one eight -- defending his record.


He demanded that the issues be discussed openly at the
next board meeting. In them, he said the chairman once
had his "unstinting confidence" but now accused him of
creating a "board within a board", excluding some
directors from its decision-making.
He said the board "needed to be careful" that board
members were not "subtly but excessively bending to the
wishes of a couple of activist shareholders, and engaging
in factionalist behaviour consistent with particular
shareholders' wishes, rather than in good corporate
governance and sensible and considered
business decision-making in the interests of shareholders
as a whole". In his second letter, he suggested that
Osborne suspected O'Brien and Desmond of acting "in
concert" and asked him what he was going to do about it
as chairman of INM.
Two days after sending that letter, Osborne met O'Brien.
His note of their conversation was produced in court.
O'Brien told him he wouldn't support O'Reilly or Buggy at
the forthcoming June AGM and said he wouldn't support a
"rights issue" -- a way of raising capital by issuing more
shares -- under current management. On March 12,
Osborne was invited to a business lunch hosted by
Desmond. Afterwards, they had a private meeting.
According to Osborne's note of the conversation, Desmond
"believed that INM deliberately closed" the Sunday
Tribune -- the loss-making INM-owned newspaper it shut
down last year -- to prevent him pursuing a legal action
against it. Desmond "admired AJF O'Reilly but felt G
O'Reilly was useless". Osborne asked Desmond how he
would vote at the AGM. He said he would "definitely"
oppose O'Reilly and Buggy and maybe others.
The turning point for O'Reilly's tenure came on March 13,
however. Pat Gaynor, of Bank of Ireland, rang Osborne for
an off-the-record, unofficial chat. According to Osborne's
note of the conversation, Gaynor told him it was the
"overriding view of the bank that substantial changes to

management were required".


The bank wouldn't say so officially, but Gaynor said he was
"authorised" to convey the message. Other banks were of a
similar view. Osborne told the court last week: "Once the
bank lost confidence in senior management, he said it was
'beholden on the board to do something about it'."
Osborne called on the other board members to declare
where they stood. He emailed each to ask whether
O'Reilly's position as CEO should be terminated with
immediate effect. "You either agree or disagree. There will
then be clarity and then we can move on to the issue of
compensation," he wrote.
Osborne set out his own view. He believed O'Reilly did not
have the support of Bank of Ireland. He said: "at least two
of the major shareholders representing 30 per cent of the
company" indicated they would vote against his
reappointment. "I do not believe his day-to-day
management of the company has been effective or that he
has credibility in the financial market place," he wrote.
Osborne did not quite get the "yes or no" answers he
demanded. In court last week, he said: "There were two
directors who felt he should go -- were quite definite about
it -- the balance took the view that we should try and work
out a compromise."
Several board members seemed uncomfortable. Baroness
Margaret Jay wrote: "I feel strongly that this is an
inappropriate way for the PLC board to conduct business
on such an important matter."
Bengt Braun wrote: "And if we can find a solution which
settles the matter instantly, an extra Z months of
compensation to a person who has spent his life in this
company, working hard and being successful and not
responsible for the current difficulties, it feels like the right
thing to do no matter what some of the aggressive letters
from shareholders (who feel offended by what the papers
write about them) say."
Osborne last week said he felt that O'Reilly was "lining up
some heavyweights" to take a court action, including the

barrister Michael McDowell, a former attorney general


and justice minister. He felt it in the best interests of the
company to favour a settlement over litigation. Their legal
advice from McCann Fitzgerald was that a shareholder
approval was not required.
On April 19, the agreement was passed by seven of nine
directors. Connolly said last week in court that he was
against the size of the award, and had urged the package to
go to shareholders. He already received legal advice that
shareholder approval would be required but didn't share it
with the board. Asked repeatedly why not, he said: "I just
didn't do it." He regarded the deal as a "fait accomplit".
The High Court has reserved judgement on whether
O'Reilly's exit deal should have been put to shareholders.
Since Friday's events, it already seems like old news.

Leslie Buckley (right) was appointed as Denis


OBriens representative to the board of
Independent News and Media (INM) in 2009.
The following correspondence took place during
the final stages of the Moriarty Tribunal.
Journalist Sam Smyth was covering proceedings
for The Irish Independent. Gavin OReilly (left) is
CEO of INM.

From: Gavin OReilly

Sent: 08 November 2010 17:43


To: Leslie Buckley
Subject: PRIVATE
Importance: High
Dear Leslie,
I got your last text message sent on Sunday morning at 8am.
Frankly, I am somewhat bemused by the plethora of calls and texts; I am
not sure what is so incredibly urgent that it has required the host of
phone calls and texts in the past week or so.
You called me last Friday week (29/10/10 when I was in Delhi) and
said that you and Denis felt that Sam Smyth should not continue his
Moriarity coverage, as you believed that he had a vendetta and that his
coverage was not balanced. However, in no discussion (then or since),
have you specifically indicated where Sams coverage is either deficient
or incorrect, except to say that the Tribunal was winding down and that
other coverage was more positive. Instead, you referenced Sams
participation on RTEs Primetime with Sarah Carey. In fact, youll recall
that you actually said that Sams article in the Indo that day (Friday,
October 29th) was very good!!
I said to you that I couldnt see any basis on which the Editor or Sam
himself would agree to any change and furthermore, I counselled that
itd be a page 1 story in The Irish Times. I also reminded you that Sams
involvement with this story goes all the way back to the start, Lowry/
Dunne etc You seemed to accept this pretty self-evident logic, and so I
naturally thought the issue was dead.
We then spoke again on Tuesday (after the Board meeting), when you
asked me to call you. You said that you and Denis accepted that Sam
couldnt be stood down, but that youd both like to see another person
covering the Tribunal (in addition to Sam). I responded by text saying
that there were a number of reporters that cover Tribunals, and that the
decision of which writer and which copy was used was the preserve of
the Editor and News Editor.
You then left me another voice message on last Thursday evening,
saying that there had been positive events at the Tribunal and that Sams
coverage was pretty negative. I responded by text on Friday evening
saying not only were the Tribunals public hearings ending but that I
had reviewed the coverage (which seemed to me to be exactly the same
as the other papers) and I couldnt see any lack of balance that you
suggested.
Leslie, I have listened to, and considered very carefully, your various

messages again and again and looked again at all the coverage, and
frankly, I cant agree that there is anything wrong, inconsistent or
unbalanced with Sams coverage. I know that there are obviously
personal issues between Denis and Sam (threatened legal actions
etc), but Id suggest that any objective review of the Indos Tribunal
coverage which is, in effect, just plain ole Court coverage confirms
that Sam has played a very straight bat with the facts (all of which are in
the public domain). I advised you last week that the issue that you are
raising goes to the very heart of INMs policy of editorial independence.
In addition, you must surely agree (privately) that Tribunal coverage
cannot be adjudicated or influenced by people that are a party to the
Tribunal.
And all that said, this entire debate seems entirely redundant at this
stage anyhow, for the specific reasons set out above (not least, the
Tribunal having ended). Therefore, I can see no sensible basis for
raising this matter with the Editor, as to do so would be viewed (in
public, at the very minimum) as direct interference on editorial matters
which not only would represent a major deviation from the past (and
the Boards policy) but Id strongly suggest, would be a hugely
retrograde step for this Company and our brand.
If you feel we need to discuss this further, it would probably be better if
we met in person (rather than short phone calls/ texts/ voice mails) on
your return from China and when I am back from Australia/ NZ (which is
w/c 22nd November.)
Hope your trip to China proves fruitful.
Regards,
Gavin

Denis OBrien, in an opinion piece in todays


Irish
Times, rounds on his critics most notably Eamon
Dunphy and Independent News and Media
(IN&M). He attacks the coverage of the findings
of the Moriarty Tribunal, and claims he is the
victim of a campaign by journalists and
broadcasters (working in organisations not
under his direct control) who, he claims, are
driven by a disturbing trend of cynicism and
nastiness. He also has a dig at the Sunday
Independents telephone polls.
Sam Smyths Sacking
If one looks at the coverage relating to me over
the past month in IN&M titles, The Irish
Times, RT and other media there is a
disturbing trend of nastiness and cynicism.
Because Today FM decided to drop a presenter
of a programme that had been running for 14

years and had falling audience numbers,


suddenly there is an eagerness to depict me as
a pariah among journalists, columnists and
broadcasters.
The logical consequence of this view is that
Communicorp [OBriens media group] or any
other radio organisation public or private would
not be able to change any of its presenters
without the accusation of editorial interference
by management or an owner.
Eamon Dunphy
Eamon Dunphy has accused me of despising
journalism (Newstalk, October 20th, 2011). It is
as untrue as it is unwarranted. I have great
respect for the many professionals in the Irish
media industry.
Eamon Dunphys claim about leaving Newstalk
in solidarity with a fellow broadcaster is hollow
given the facts. Dunphy left because of money.
Im with the old-style mogul, Eamon Dunphy
declared in a lengthy article for this newspaper
[Irish Times] on April 12th, 2008, in relation to
the shareholdings in Independent News & Media
of both Tony OReilly and myself.
Dunphy penned his heavily opinionated piece as
a journalist and a citizen. He was
unashamedly pro-OReilly, which is all very fine,
but was it an objective, unbiased article? It
certainly was not, particularly given a revelation
in the Sunday Times (May 9th, 2010). When
Dunphy was probed about the Irish
Times OReilly v OBrien article his interviewer,
journalist Michael Ross, elicited the unvarnished
truth: What he [Dunphy] neglected to mention,
either to The Irish Times or in the piece, was

that he had written it at the request of Tony


OReilly. When this was put to him Dunphy
revealed: It was a favour to [Tony] OReilly,
who asked me to write it.
Dunphy explained that he did not mention this
at the time because he did not think it was
relevant to the commentary. Vintage
Dunphy . . . only disclose what fits your agenda.
When it comes to Dunphys diatribes and vitriol
I find myself in good company Seamus
Heaney, Dick Spring, Pat Kenny, Proinsias De
Rossa, John Hume, et al.
If I had the editorial control as alleged I would
not have allowed his final programme to be
aired. I doubt RT or any other print media
company would have taken that risk. After his
first stint at Newstalk in 2006 he described me
as bitter . . . small-minded ( The Irish
Times, April 12th, 2008). He was subsequently
re-hired in 2008. So much for my supposed
editorial interference.
Editorial Interference
In recent weeks I have been reminded by a
number of journalists of the unprecedented
decision taken by theIrish Independent to
publish a front-page editorial entitled Pay Back
Time urging readers to vote out the rainbow
coalition and put Fianna Fil back in power on
the eve of the 1997 general election.
Some will also remember then-government
adviser Sen Donlon subsequently revealing at
the Moriarty tribunal how at a meeting in 1996
Tony OReilly let the then-taoiseach John Bruton
know how unhappy he was with the way his
interests (Moriarty tribunal) were being

treated by the government. Mr Donlon added


that he was left in no doubt about the potential
hostility of Independent Newspapers if
outstanding matters were not resolved.
No one has accused Communicorp or any of its
stations of trying to influence voters in any
election. It was down the middle all the way.
Moriarty Tribunal
Articles about me especially in IN&M titles
invariably include references to the Moriarty
tribunal where I spent 10 years giving evidence
and opening up all my files and bank accounts.
My views of the Moriarty tribunal are best
captured by Supreme Court judge Adrian
Hardiman (court report, The Irish Times , July
15th, 2011).
He has described the powers of modern
tribunals of inquiry as truly awesome, their
expense truly enormous, the cost of
participating in them grotesque and their
duration as nothing less than appalling.
He said tribunals are legally sterile . . . devoid
of legal consequences and cannot be used in
legal proceedings as either a weapon or a
shield. I have repeatedly refuted all the findings
in detail. All I want to say here is that the
findings were based on opinions, not on
evidence, much of which was, in my opinion,
airbrushed out.
Independent News and Media
I have been the largest shareholder in IN&M for
the past four years. My punishment apart
from the economic cost has been a prolonged,
nasty, well-orchestrated campaign against me

across a range of issues. Articles are regularly


published without me being given an
opportunity to respond. But then the normal
demarcation between board and management,
on the one hand, and editorial on the other,
does not exist.
The hostile reaction to my shareholding in IN&M
has been seamlessly executed through the
editorial pages of all their publications. The
editorial pages reflect the views of senior
management faultlessly. The Sunday
Independent has a unique position on the Irish
media landscape for all the wrong reasons. Its
phone polls of questionable provenance,
absence of objectivity, and its unwarranted
attacks on individuals will provide the next
generation of media studies students with the
raw material for a fascinating thesis.

BottomLogo

This is not going to end well.

Lucinda Creighton Interview EU Friend Or


Foe1
Mar 13, 2015
mirrored from mirrored from
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2lj...
mirrored from UCmt6qQyIAnjHxLc9mGEio0Q

https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=wCBjkdllxzE

Modular apartments
planned for Dublin city sites
At least 100 stackable factory-built housing unites to be
located at two city centre sites
Tue, Sep 27, 2016, 01:00

Olivia Kelly

The council is following a model used by Londons Lewisham council which


has completed a modular apartment complex providing 24 homes for families
living in emergency accommodation. Photograph: Martin Godwin

Fifty years after the construction of the Ballymun flats,


Dublin City Council is returning to pre-fabricated
apartment blocks to provide a solution to the housing
and homeless crises.
At least 100 modular apartments are to be erected in
Dublin city centre to provide homes for people living in
emergency accommodation.
The council has identified two sites in the city for the
volumetric build project, which will involve

stacking factory-built housing units to form


apartment blocks.
The council is separately assessing three sites in
suburban Dublin, at Coolock, Ballyfermot and Finglas
for the next phase of standard two storey modular
housing.
The council is following a model used by Lewisham
Borough Council in South London which earlier this
year completed a modular apartment complex which
provided 24 homes for families living in emergency
accommodation.

The four-storey apartment blocks on Lewisham High


Street were built in 12 weeks at a cost of about
150,000 per apartment. The council plans to leave
them in place for three years, after which they will be
unstacked and moved to another location. The
apartments have a 60-year life span and are designed
to be relocated up to five times.
These technologies arent new but havent been used
in this way before, Jeff Endean, housing strategy

manager at Lewisham Council said. You have a


number of wooden boxes stacked and simply
unstacked again. This is a prototype, but I think theres
something in it in terms of addressing the housing
crisis.
The council is housing Lewisham families in B&B
accommodation as far away as Margate, 70 miles away
on the south east coast and is paying B&B owners 3
million a year for emergency accommodation.
The project has cost 5.8 million and has a 60 years
life span. At 150,000 per unit it has turned out high
quality flats will save us 135,000 every year on the
cost of bed and breakfast.
Mr Endean was speaking at a Dublin City Council
seminar in July. The council has now decided to go
ahead with its own, much larger apartment project at
sites yet to be named in the city.

Urban sites

The sites we have been working on are inner city


urban sites, and we will be going out for architectural
services for a framework for volumetric build in the
next week or so, city council executive housing
manager Tony Flynn said.
We anticipate having 100 units, and if we can get
more than 100 in the pilot thats what well do.
Paul Keogh, chair of the housing committee of the
Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland, said he
welcomed measures to address the housing shortage,
but urged caution in relation to using modular
apartments on city infill sites.
Modular housing is usually reserved for greenfield
suburban sites and is generally not appropriate for
infill sites in the city where youre dealing with
irregularly shaped sites and you have surrounding
buildings to take into account so you need tailored

solutions.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/modu
lar-apartments-planned-for-dublin-city-sites1.2806520

The Housing Crisis is a cash


cow flow,

On The Subject of Landlords:


At the last count, there were 339,431 Non Principal Private
Residences in Ireland. The state received 183,551 recorded
payments from landlords for those properties.
Census 2011 identified 59,395 of these as holiday homes. It must be
relatively safe to assume the remaining Non Principal Private
Residences are available to rent.
That leaves 280,036 houses, and 124,156 landlords to account for.
With these figures alone it is suggested that the average landlord
owns less than 2.5 rental properties.
Thats how Spin works.
Pay Attention
Holiday home or not, there are 135,971 landlords with only 1 Non
Principal Private Residence property.
That leaves 203,460 houses, and 47,580 landlords to account for.
These figures suggest the average number of rental properties per
landlord is closer to 4.5.

In the interest of fair play, well discount any landlord owning 10 or


less properties to rent. There are 45,397 such landlords. The State
considers these profiteers to be minor landlords.
That leaves 2183 Landlords in control of most of the rental property
available in Ireland.
There are currently 45 TDs sitting in the Dail who receive income as
landlords.
11 TDs have officially recorded their occupation on the Register of
Interests as Landlord.
The most vulgar example is former Minister for Health, current
Minister for Children and Doctor under Hippocratic Oath James O
Reilly who records his occupation in the eyes of the state as
Landlord.
Rent rates are increasing at almost 6 times the rate of inflation, with
Dublin City alone suffering a 34% increase in the cost of rental
accommodation over the course of this governments
administration.
Homelessness has been steadily increasing since cuts to rent
allowance were announced in 2012, and homelessness will continue
to increase as a result of the abolition of Mortgage Interest Relief in
2017.
This puts pressure on the state to provide for those in need.
The Government will insist on pointing to that 4 Billion Euro
investment in social housing as a response to any criticism of their
inactivity on The Housing Crisis.
Local Authorities have started to confirm that an average of 75% of
funds released will be used to pay landlords for properties rented by
Local Authorities due to the lack of new social housing units.
This means only that the Government (made up of 45 landlords and
121 other TDs) has decided to use the bulk of 4 Billion Euros
earmarked to fund Social Housing to instead fund the businesses of
2183 landlords between now and 2020.
Dont forget the 45,397 landlords we excused from the equation on
the basis that they only own 10 Rental Properties or less. They profit
too.
The State will save 400 Million Euros with the abolition of Mortgage
Interest Relief.
Landlords will take approximately 3 Billion Euros of public funding in
lieu of it being spent on the construction of new Social Housing
Units.
The Banks will profit from the facilitation and management of this
capital flow.
All of these people and the institutions they represent profit from
this State of Affairs while we, the people suffer to support them.
The Housing Crisis is a cash cow.
Think about that.
This State has failed its citizens.
This country is ruled by businessmen and the servants of
businessmen, whose objectives are self promotion for profit and the

advancement of those interests held by their peers and associates.


We have, as a nation for generations now given our consent by
ballot to be governed by self publicists and the grubby hand of
greed.
We have voted successive shambolic administrations into power.
They rule only because we allow them to and we have been
exposed as participants in our own oppression by the implied
consent of our silence.
Its about time that we Make More Noise.
Our previous inactivity and our current inability to act in unanimity
allow the government to prioritise the accumulation and protection
of wealth over servitude to the people.
The banks and financial institutions deciding our economic direction
have shown no ability to curb their own gluttony.
They have between them ensured that we are burdened with the
results of their poor choices to an extent that it will disenfranchise
generations of Irelands children.
Our failure to promote to public office individuals who will act for the
good of the people is their greatest asset. The current government
is the latest in a line of mistakes that weve allowed to continue
unchecked for far too long.
Play Your Part. Make informed decisions. Vote for Change.

And so it begins in New York! ENOUGH! We must rise up to end


medical tyranny and the erosion of our liberties!

re you freaking serious!? Ugh so basically your child is almost dead


and you may still need to immunize ... Ignorance, BS, makes me sick
and here in California they are coming after people like me with a
child grandfathered into the school year for his PBE!!! And now I am
going to do everything I can to keep anyone's child from this bogus
fear mongering
it depends on where the parents are. In New York City and the
surrounding burroughs, yes interviews do happen and often are
intrusive. In most other counties, it is not as bad. Several advocacy
groups are working together to protect the religious exemption law
and make it easier for parents. We have some wonderful advocates
that help parents with religious exemptions as well. is where we
send ny residents. This is literally the book on ny exemptions and
guides parents through the process.

MY KIDS, MY CHOICE
RELIGIOUS WAIVERS THREATENED The American Academy of
Pediatrics has recommended repealing ALL religious exemptions in
the country! Protect our right to say 'if, when and how many' How?
By meeting...
move out of state" ?
How dare they taunt people with such disrespect an obscence
attitude of arrogance

Mar 22, 2012


Prime Time examines the details of the Mahon Report.
Stay up to date with all the latest Irish and international news
with http://www.rte.ie/newsnow and follow us on Twitter
@RTENewsNow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5RSYKa8duk

The Moriarty Report: One Year On


Mar 30, 2012
For more go to: www.rte.ie/newsnow
Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RTENewsNow
An exclusive interview with Barry Maloney one year on from
the publication of the Moriarty Report.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZbQqgvhtSE

The Mahon Report - The Tribunal


Mar 22, 2012
Prime Time examines the details of the Mahon Report.

Stay up to date with all the latest Irish and international news
with http://www.rte.ie/newsnow and follow us on Twitter
@RTENewsNow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5RSYKa8duk

Mahon Report
rejects Bertie
Ahern's evidence
Updated / Aug. 20, 2013

Former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has insisted


that he told the truth to the Mahon Tribunal
and that he would examine ways of
vindicating his name.
Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin tonight said
he would be recommending the expulsion of
Mr Ahern and former EU commissioner
Padraig Flynn from the party in light of the
final report of the Mahon Tribunal.
In a statement tonight, Mr Ahern said he hid
nothing, gave the Tribunal unfettered access
to all his financial records, and after years of
investigation, it made no finding of corruption

against him.
He said he strongly rejected any suggestion
that he sought to mislead it and that he
found it remarkable that his evidence had
been "summarily rejected" even where there
was no evidence to the contrary.
The Mahon Report, published today, found
that Mr Ahern gave untrue evidence about
the source of over 215,000 lodged in bank
accounts connected to him.
The report also made findings of corruption
against former minister Mr Flynn, developer
Owen O'Callaghan, the late TD Liam Lawlor
and 11 councillors.
If you are using the RT News Now app, go to
http://m.rte.ie in your mobile internet
browser to see all the live blog photos + links
Mahon Tribunal: Full report | Overview
On page lvi of the table of content and on
page 2502 Chapter seventeen, of the
Tribunals final report, Mr Conor Haugheys
name is mistakenly stated instead of Mr
Ciaran Haughey. Mr Conor Haughey had no
involvement with the Tribunal inquiries.
The Tribunal has unreservedly apologised to
Mr Conor Haughey for this error.
Amended report in link above
What did the Mahon Tribunal cost?
Profiles: Frank Dunlop | Liam Lawlor |
Owen O'Callaghan | Tom Gilmartin

Corruption affected 'every level of Irish


political life'Bertie Ahern failed to
truthfully account for source of money
Padraig Flynn wrongly and corruptly
sought donationsLiam Lawlor accepted
inappropriate and corrupt payments'
Owen O'Callaghan paid 1.8m to Frank
Dunlop over 10 years
Updates:
2135 Fianna Fil has issued a statement
saying it will seek to expel Bertie Ahern from
the party.
The motion will be put forward at a special
meeting of its national executive next week.
The statement said the manner in which he
received this money while holding high office
meant he betrayed the trust placed in him by
the country and the party.
The party has also said it will seek to expel
former EU Commissioner Padraig Flynn and
councillors GV Wright, Don Lydon and
Finbarr Hanrahan.
2125 Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin will
seek the expulsion of Bertie Ahern and
Padraig Flynn from the party.
2036 Former taoiseach Bertie Ahern has
issued a statement on the Mahon
Tribunal report.
"After spending over a decade of inquiries
and countless millions of euros, the Tribunal
has not made - nor could it make - a finding
to support the scurrilous and untrue
allegation allegation that I had been given a

corrupt payment by Mr Owen O'Callaghan


(the Cork based developer of Quarryvale) or
any of his companies.
"I have never received a corrupt payment
and I have never doneanything to demean
any office I have held. I know that some
peoplewill feel that some aspects of my
personal finances are unusual andthat in
retrospect it is obvious I was wrong not to
have paid moreattention to my financial
affairs and records.
"I hid nothing. I gave the Tribunal unfettered
access to all myfinancial records, and after
years of investigation, this Tribunal hasnot
made any finding of corruption against me. I
have told the truthto this Tribunal, and I
reject strongly any suggestion that I soughtto
mislead it" - Bertie Ahern
2023 Fianna Fil TD Sen Fleming says he
is writing to the tribunal to seek an "urgent
correction".
"The Tribunal report, most probably
inadvertently, implied that I, in my capacity
as former Financial Controller of Fianna Fil,
was aware of the IR50,000 payment to Mr
Padraig Flynn by Mr Tom Gilmartin. This is
simply not the case."
"I fully recognise the findings of the Tribunal
report. However since an incorrect statement
has been made against me which has
significant consequences for me as a serving
politician and Chartered Accountant I believe
and hope that the Tribunal will move to

correct this small but significant error."


2018 "The Mahon Report vindicates those
who fought against corrupt planning and it
shames elements of our political system from
the top down" - Eamon Ryan.
1837 "These people betrayed the trust the
Irish people put in them and betrayed the
trust that members of the party up and down
the country put in them" - Michel Martin
1833 "I accept the findings of the tribunal" Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin,
speaking on Six One.
Asked if Bertie Ahern's position in Fianna Fil
was untenable, Martin said he did not want to
pre-empt the Fianna Fil officer board
meeting tonight.
"I did promise swift and comprehensive
action... There are procedures we have to
work through... Within the next short period
we will have a clear indication of what action
we (Fianna Fil) are going to take"
1824 Some interesting quotes from 2007
(discussing Bertie Ahern's appearance at the
Mahon Tribunal)
20 December 2007 - Dermot Ahern:
"I find it quite astonishing. the line of
questioning from the Tribunal brings to mind
what Supreme Court Judge Sue Denham said
back in July when the Supreme Court had a
decision on the Tribunal where they said the
Oireachtas had given the Tribunal a job to do
to investigate urgent planning matters and
she said what was happening 10 years on

was the antithesis of an investigation into


urgent planning matters."
21 December 2007 - Willie O'Dea:
"I'm waiting for the day that the tribunal
goes back to Bertie Ahern's first communion
money and starts questioning whether he got
it in notes or coins or whether he put it in a
real bank or a piggy bank or did he get a half
crown from Owen O'Callaghan.
"Where are we going and where is it going to
finish up?"
21 December 2007 - Dick Roche:
"I felt it was petty, it was personal and
prurient and at times, it bordered on
voyeurism.
I found it difficult to see yesterday what a lot
of the cross examination had to do with...
(the matter at hand)"
1752 David McCullagh: The Fianna Fil
Officer Board - which is to meet this evening
to consider the Mahon Report - can make
recomendations to the party's National
Executive, but can't itself take disciplinary
action against party members.
Seven days notice has to be given for any
meeting to consider disciplinary action, and
while a National Executive meeting was due
to be held next week, Friday would be the
earliest date for a special meeting.
The members of the Officer Board are the
party leader, Micheal Martin; the five Vice

Presidents, Senator Mary White, Deputy


Timmy Dooley, former TD Aine Brady,
Kathryn Byrne, and Lisa Chambers; the two
honorary secretaries, Deputy Dara Calleary
and former TD Margaret Conlon; and the two
Honorary Treasurers, Niall Collins TD and
Hugh Dolan.
1705 Former TD Noel Ahern says he is
pleased the central accusation against his
brother was found to be untrue.
Speaking to RT News outside St Luke's in
Drumcondra, he said that the accusation that
Bertie Ahern received 80,000 from Owen
O'Callaghan had not been proven.
Noel Ahern said he was disappointed the
tribunal did not fully accept the evidence
given by the former Taoiseach and others
who spoke for him.
"It is a pity Bertie didn't convince the tribunal
of the truth of what he had to say."
1649 Michel Lehane has been looking at
Bertie Ahern's evidence at the Mahon
Tribunal
1629 Transparency International Ireland
is calling for radical reform of how corruption
is investigated.
"It took 15 years and some 300 million to
find out what the garda and Standards in
Public Office Commission should have
exposed. The problem was law enforcement
agencies were never allowed to do their job."
1616 Statement by Charlie Flanagan on
behalf of Fine Gael:

"The Party is currently studying the report


and its findings and wholeheartedly
welcomes the announcement by An
Taoiseach, Enda Kenny TD, that the
Government has referred the report to the
Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), the
Garda Commissioner, the Revenue
Commissioners and the Standards in Public
Office Commission.
"Serving Fine Gael public representatives
against whom any adverse findings have
been made will be dealt with by way of the
Party's internal disciplinary procedures."
1614 Joe Mag Raollaigh just knocked on the
door of St Lukes. No answer.

1547 Bertie Ahern's 1997 statement on the


McCracken Tribunal
1522 One section of the report, believed to
be the module dealing with Carrickmines, has
been withheld for legal reasons. The Tribunal

says this runs to 200 pages and will be


published "as soon as possible".
1512 Joe Higgins says the report is a
"damning indictment of the corrupt nexus
between developers and establishment
politicians, especially from Fianna Fil."
1445 Frank Dunlop says he has "absolutely
no comment" to make in relation to the
Tribunal findings.
1415 All 3,270 pages of the Mahon Report (it
is easier - and kinder to the environment - to
just click the link at the top of this page to
read it)

1410 The tribunal is recommending that


Standards in Public Office Commission (SIPO)
be given an increased role in the
enforcement of conflict of interest measures,
in so far as both the Oireachtas members and
local councillors are concerned.
It is recommending the introduction of

simplified complaint procedures, that


anonymous complaints be permitted, and
that SIPO be given increased powers of
investigation.
1408 The tribunal wants stricter regulation of
gifts given to government ministers, and for
it to be a criminal offence for a minister to
"retain a gift above a nominal value", which
is received in connection with that office and
where that gift or benefit is "not lawfully
due".
It recommends that "politically exposed
persons", who are currently liable to be
monitored, be widened so that those who
leave public office be included for not just
one year after they depart but for ten years
after they leave office.
1345 Taoiseach Enda Kenny says he is
surprised by the findings Mahon Tribunal
report.
"It clearly sets out corrupt practices by a
number of politicians... The findings in
relation to Bertie Ahern speak for
themselves.
"As far as Fine Gael is concerned ... I have
referred the report to the internal disciplinary
committee."

1326 Caitrona Perry profiles Frank


Dunlop and his evidence at the tribunal.
1324 There is concern that recent changes in
the planning system have resulted in an
over-centralisation of power in the
hands of the Minister for the
Environment, which is not subject to
sufficient checks and balances.
The tribunal is recommending that the
Minister for the Environment's ability to give
directions to Regional Authorities and Local
Planning Authorities should be entrusted to a
Planning Regulator.
1323 A recommendation has been made that
where elected members use the material
contravention procedure to grant planning
permission, they should be required to
give at least one month's notice of their
intention to do so to the relevant regional
authority and to the Minister for the
Environment.

1318 The tribunal recommends that the term


donation be changed to include "any
donation given, used or received for political
purposes".
It should also be more strictly regulated to
prohibit indirect donations which "pose
corruption risks" as do anonymous and cash
donations.
These should be prohibited above a
certain value; 55 for donations to an
individual and 175 to a political party.
It also wants an overall limit placed on the
amount which an individual may donate, as
the current arrangement could allow
"corruption or the appearance of corruption".
It also asks that expenditure rules be
extended to cover "all political expenditure,
as those rules are currently deficient from an
"anti-corruption perspective".
1314 The Government is to refer the report
to the Garda Commissioner, the Director
of Public Prosecutions, the Revenue
Commissioners and to the Standards in
Public Office Commission.
A statement from the Government said: "A
three-day Dil debate on the report will take
place next week.
"The Government will consider the findings
and recommendations next Tuesday."
1311 The property developer Owen
O'Callaghan will seek judicial review of the
findings of the Mahon Tribunal which he
"utterly rejects."

"The Tribunal arrived at its conclusions based


on procedures which were biased, unfair and
unjust."

1246 Liam Lawlor abused his role as an


elected public representative to a very
significant degree.
In the 1980s and 1990s, Lawlor provided
services and advice to
landowners/developers (including to Dunlop
as their agent) in his capacity as an elected
politician, for personal gain.
In effect, Lawlor, while an elected public
representative, conducted a personal
business in the course of which he corruptly
sold his expertise, knowledge and
influence as a councillor and as a TD for

personal financial reward.


1254 Findings of corruption have been made
against 11 councillors.
Five of these cannot be named because they
are before the courts.
The six named individuals are Fianna Fils
Finbarr Hanrahan, Cyril Gallagher and
GV Wright, Fine Gael's Tom Hand,
Labour's John O'Halloran and
Independent Pat Dunne.
1248 Liam Lawlor's relationship with Frank
Dunlop and Owen O'Callaghan was "firmly
based in corruption."
The bulk of funds paid by Dunlop and
O'Callaghan to Lawlor were payments made
directly in relation to Lawlor's activities
concerning the rezoning of Quarryvale.
1247 The contention by Charlie Haughey's
son - Conor Haughey, - that he and John
Barnicle had only got IR10,000 from the
proceeds of the sale of Abervanta Ltd's
interest in the Cargobridge lands was
rejected.
Evidence was given to the tribunal in 2006 to
conceal the fact that Haughey and
Barnicle had between them received in
the region of IR164,000 from the sale.
1238 The suggestion that Eamon Dunphy
"embellished or otherwise altered his
evidence" was rejected.
Owen O'Callaghan conveyed to Mr Dunphy
that Ahern had been "given an inducement
and was "taken care of by O'Callaghan in

return for a promised favour".


This was corroborative of Gilmartin's
allegations in relation to Quarryvale.
It was also accepted that O'Callaghan told Mr
Dunphy that O'Callaghan "gave
inducements to politicians" and also
"found it necessary to engage in corrupt
activity in order to successfully develop
property in Dublin".
1237 Beverly Flynn has told RT News that
her father - Pdraig Flynn - is making no
comment on the findings of the Tribunal
report.
1328 Statement from Bertie Ahern's
spokesperson:
"Bertie Ahern is reviewing the final report of
the Mahon Tribunal and will issue a
statement in due course."
1216 There has been no sign of Bertie
Ahern at his home in Drumcondra today,
though his vehicle is parked at the property.
At least 10 photographers have been waiting
outside the house - some since 7.30am.

1211 Conor Hunt has been taking a look at


the controversial issue of costs at the Mahon
Tribunal
1201 Bertie Ahern should be honest with
people and tell the truth, according to
Independent TD John Halligan
Speaking to RT News, Deputy Halligan said
many people are asking questions about
where the money came from.
"It would do no harm to be honest with them
at this stage."
1156 Frank Dunlop's practice of making
payments to councillors was known to
those who met him in November 1992. At the
time he was a lobbying to secure the
rezoning of the Lissenhall Lands.
Tim Collins, Michael Hughes and Colm Moran
acquiesced in the "contemplated corrupt
activity on the part of Mr Dunlop.
Cllr Cyril Gallagher received a IR1,000
corrupt payment in relation to the Lissenhall

rezoning.
An acceptance of a IR20,000 payment, from
Rayband Ltd, by Cllr Ann Devitt was "entirely
inappropriate.
1151 The Tribunal rejected Bertie Ahern's
claim that he had no recollection of the
lodgement of STG15,500 over the course of
seven months in 1994 to his own and his
daughters Irish Permanent accounts.
The tribunal did not believe Mr Ahern had
saved sterling towards an investment
property in Manchester, but was unable to
determine the source of the funds as Ahern
failed to truthfully account for them.
1139 Pdraig Flynn requested that Tom
Gilmartin make a substantial donation to
Fianna Fil, probably at a meeting in April
1989.
The request was made on the understanding
that steps would be taken by Flynn to ease or
remove obstacles and difficulties being faced
by Gilmartin in relation to Quarryvale.

1133 "I was genuinely shocked at how


forthright it was" - Journalist Sam Smyth on
the publication of the Mahon Report.
1120 In relation to the lodgement of
28,772.90 to a bank account of Celia
Larkin on 5 December 1994, the source of
the lodgement was not STG30,000, as
Bertie Ahern contended, but was "in fact
US$45,000 cash".
1127 A decision in 1992 by Pat Rabbitte,
then a Democratic Left Councillor and TD, to
return a donation of IR2,000 to Frank Dunlop
was described as "commendable and
correct.
1115 In relation to a request to Owen
O'Callaghan for a donation to Fianna Fil
made by letter from Albert Reynolds and
Bertie Ahern in September 1993 - which
culminated in a donation for IR80,000 the tribunal said it was against the backdrop
of OCallaghan lobbying for state subvention

for a sports stadium in Neilstown.


Mr O Callaghan "felt compelled to make the
donation" because of his concern that failing
to do so would impact negatively on his effort
to get Government support and funding for
the project.
The tribunal does not deem the request for
the donation corrupt, but said it was entirely
inappropriate and an abuse of political power
and government authority.
1118 More on the Bertie Ahern
payments:
Ahern failed to disclose the source of the
following lodgments:
IR30,000 on 25 April 1994IR20,000 on
8 August 1994IR24,838 on 11 October
1994 This lodgement "had in fact been
funded by STG25,000"
1115 Tom Gilmartin's told the tribunal he
received a call from a person who identified
himself as "Garda Burns", who effectively
warned him against speaking to garda
about allegations of corrupt payments and
demands for money.
The purpose of the call "was to discourage,
intimidate or warn Gilmartin to desist" from
any further cooperation with the garda
inquiry.
1114 Complaints by Tom Gilmartin to garda
about Redmond, Lawlor and Cllr Hanrahan
were not thoroughly investigated.
1108 Tom Gilmartin claimed that in
February 1989, when he emerged from a

meeting room in Leinster House with then


Taoiseach Charles Haughey and a number
of ministers, he was confronted by a an
unidentified person who proceeded to
corruptly demand IR5m from him.
He also told the tribunal he was provided by
the individual with details of an offshore
account into which the money was to be
paid.
1108 Former Fianna Fil TD GV Wright
received a IR5,000 "corrupt" payment from
Christopher Jones in November 1992, in
relation to the Ballycullen/Beechill rezoning
projects.
The money was not given to assist his
political expenses, but rather to ensure he
would "exert influence on his Fianna Fil
councillor colleagues."
1104 Of monies paid by Owen OCallaghan
to Shefran Ltd - IR65,000 was retained
by Frank Dunlop, who paid most or all of
this to councillors for the purpose of securing
their support for rezoning the Quarryvale
lands.
These payments took place close to the time
of local elections in 1991 and the tribunal
said they were corrupt payments.
1100 Bertie Ahern's "usual practice" in the
period 1987-1993 was "to cash salary and
expenses cheques...rather than using a bank
account", but it rejects Ahern's evidence that
he had accumulated about IR54,000 in
savings.

1058 Evidence given by two Arlington


executives - that they could not recall why
they gave Lawlor STG33,000 in April 1989 was rejected.
The tribunal says it is satisfied was not, as
claimed by Lawlor, a political donation.
It is satisfied that Lawlor accompanied
Gilmartin to a meeting with Assistant City
and County Manager George Redmond in
May 1988, and at it corruptly requested
payment of IR 100,000 for himself and a
similar amount for Mr Redmond.
This request was rejected by Gilmartin. The
tribunal finds that Mr Redmond was aware
that this request was being made on his
behalf by Lawlor, and was complicit in this. It
also finds that Lawlor did seek a 20% stake in
the Quarryvale project on two separate
occasions, and such demands were corrupt.
1055 The tribunal rejects that a collection
was held in December 1993 by Des

Richardson and Gerry Brennan, and


rejects that Bertie Ahern was given 22,5000
"in the manner claimed" on 27 December
1993. It says that Mr Ahern did not receive
that sum "either as a gift or as a loan".
The tribunal also rejected the evidence of
Bertie Ahern, Des Richardson, Charlie
Chawke, Michael Collins, David McKenna and
Jim Nugent in relation to the collection.
It did accept Padraic O'Connor's assertion
that he and Mr Ahern were not close personal
friends in 1993, and also accepted Mr
O'Connor's evidence that Des Richardson
requested a donation be made towards the
expenses of Mr Ahern's constituency office,
but not to Bertie Ahern personally.
The tribunal was unable to confirm Des
Richardson's evidence that a bank draft for
IR5,000 (included in the IR22,500
payment) had been funded by NCB
Stockbrokers on Mr O'Connor's instructions.
"Contrary to Mr Ahern's claim," the tribunal
found that the payment did not come from
Mr O'Connor personally.
The tribunal accepted Padraic O'Connor's
evidence that Bertie Ahern - contrary to Mr
Ahern's claim - never acknowledged a
payment of 5000, nor did Mr Ahern offer to
repay the money.
1051 Liam Lawlor was paid IR40,000 by
Frank Dunlop in 1991 which was funded by
payments from Mr O'Callaghan to a company
called Shefran Ltd, and that Owen O'

Callaghan was fully aware of the payment to


Lawlor.
It also finds that Lawlor received payments
totalling IR41,000 from OCallaghan
between 1991 and 1996 and states that the
relationship of Lawlor with Dunlop and O'
Callaghan was firmly based in corruption.
The bulk of payments made by Dunlop and
O'Callaghan to Lawlor from 1991 to 96
concerned the rezoning of Quarryvale lands
and were corrupt.
1046 The tribunal finds that the late Liam
Lawlor, then a councillor and TD, accepted
inappropriate and corrupt payments
from Arlington PLC.
It accepts Tom Gilmartin's evidence regarding
his first meeting with the Mr Lawlor - the
venue and the topic of discussion - Arlington
and Bachelors Walk.
It also accepts Gilmartin's claim that Mr
Lawlor claimed to be a representative of the
Irish Government. It accepts that at a date in
May 1998, Lawlor attended uninvited at
Arlington plc's offices in London and claimed
to be a representative of the Irish
Government.
The tribunal says it is satisfied that on the
basis of these representations, Arlington
believed Lawlor was so close to government
that a failure by them to make significant
payments to him might result in a lack of
support from the government and authorities
for the Bachelor's Walk project, making it

more difficult to achieve.


The tribunal says that this resulted in
Arlington giving the equivalent of almost
STG75,000 in payments to Mr Lawlor over
an 11 month period - acceptance of which
was inappropriate and corrupt.

1036 Former Minister and EU Commissioner


Padraig Flynn "wrongly and corruptly"
sought a substantial donation from Mr Tom
Gilmartin for the Fianna Fail party and having
being paid IR50,000 by Mr Gilmartin for
that purpose proceeded to use that money
for his personal benefit.
The Tribunal was satisfied that the 50,000
funded at least a significant portion of the
purchase of a farm in Co Mayo in the
name of Padraig Flynns wife and was not
used except minimally for political
expenditure associated with Mr Flynn.

1028 A lodgement of IR28,772.90 made by


Celia Larkin on 5 December 5 1994 into an
AIB account on Upper O'Connell Street was
not - as contended by Bertie Ahern - around
Stg30,000 in cash, given by Micheal Wall,
but was in fact $45,000 dollars in cash
1021 The Tribunal says its investigations into
Bertie Ahern's accounts sought to establish
or exclude a connection between funds
related to Mr Ahern and Mr Owen
O'Callaghan, but its inquiries in this regard
were "inconclusive."
This was so because much of the
explanations provided by Ahern, as to the
source of the substantial funds available to
him, were deemed by the Tribunal to be
"untrue".
1015 The report stops short of a corruption
finding in respect of former Taoiseach Bertie
Ahern but it totally rejects his evidence and
that of related witnesses about the sources of
monies in his own and related bank accounts.
It says Ahern failed to truthfully account
for a total of IR165,214.25 passing
through accounts connected with him.
It also finds that in relation to the B/T
account, known as the Bertie/Tim account by
bank staff in the Permanent TSB, Ahern and
his associate Tim Collins failed to truthfully
account for IR50,000 lodged into this
account between 1992-94.
In the introduction to the Report the Judges
say a number of senior Cabinet ministers

made sustained and virulent attacks on the


integrity of the Tribunal members.
They say there is "little doubt" the objectives
of these extraordinary and unprecedented
attacks on the Tribunal was to undermine the
efficient conduct of the Tribunal, erode its
independence and

The corruption at the heart of Irish


society
22 March 2012 Vincent Browne

Right at the beginning of this mammoth report is the killer line:


The Tribunals inquiries uncovered evidence of deep-rooted,
systemic corruption in Irish public life.
Commenting on the findings of this, the fifth and final report of the

Planning Tribunal, it states: it was satisfied that at least for some


councillors in Dublin County Council, corruption had become a
regular aspect of their public role. Those councillors exercised their
public powers in their own interests rather than in the interests of
the public and bartered that power in exchange for cash and/or
other benefits. There was apparently no shortage of persons
prepared to pay for the corrupt exercise of public power and large
tracts of land were ultimately rezoned because of the making and
receipt of corrupt payments rather than in the interests of proper
land use and development.
The report goes on to say: This corruption was, at the time it
occurred, an open secret and it poses the question: Given the
existence of such rampant public corruption, the obvious question
is why it was allowed to continue unabated? Its short answer to
that question is: It continued because nobody was prepared to do
enough to stop it. This is perhaps inevitable when corruption
ceases to become an isolated event and becomes so entrenched
that it is transformed into an acknowledged way of doing business.
Specifically, because corruption affected every level of Irish
political life, those with the power to stop it were frequently
implicated in it.
Moreover, the general apathy on the part of the public towards
that corruption meant that there was insufficient pressure from the
public to compel their representatives to take firm action to curtail
or eliminate it.
The apathy continues. The indifference of the present Government
to the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal that made such devastating
findings about the businessman, Denis OBrien, is represented in
the regular presence and apparently welcome presence of the
same Denis OBrien at Irish government functions and
appearances with the Taoiseach and other senior office holders.
Anybody who paid even scant attention to the work of the Mahon
Tribunal from 2006 to 2008 knew that Bertie Aherns explanations
for the origins of tens of thousands of pounds that flowed through

his bank accounts were not remotely credible and yet, again and
again government ministers defended his indefensible integrity and
truthfulness. And among them was Michel Martin.
And in the course of such protestations government ministers
attempted to undermine the integrity and credibility of the Tribunal.
The report comments on this: It was entirely inappropriate for
members of the Government to launch such unseemly and
partisan attacks against a Tribunal of Inquiry appointed following a
resolution passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas to inquire
into serious concerns regarding corruption in public life. There
appears little doubt but that the objective of these extraordinary
and unprecedented attacks on the Tribunal was to undermine the
efficient conduct of the Tribunals inquiries, erode its independence
and collapse its inquiry into that individual. They were
as regrettable as they were ill-considered and unfounded.
But is the corruption that is the subject of this report and of such
outrage tonight even on the same scale of the corruption at the
heart of this society in its massive inequalities, injustices, cruelties,
and in the monstrous injustice of the complicity of the previous
government and the present Government in the infliction of a debt
on this society that will impair it for generations?
We are curating #vinb comments during the show below and
Vincent will respond to the issues raised afterward. Keep
refreshing the page to see updates.

Ethics in banking a question of


regulation

15 May 2013 Shelia Killian

<img
typeof="foaf:Image"
src="http://politico.ie/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/Jo
hnBruton.jpg?itok=qWvzS6CM"width="300"height="160"/>
Last week former Taoiseach and President of IFSC Ireland, John
Bruton, said that the banking industry needed "to focus on ethics
rather than regulation". As someone who strongly supports the
idea of ethical codes and a more central role for ethics in business,
I found this remark and the casual way it was accepted unhelpful
on many levels. Ethics are not an alternative to regulation; rather
regulation is needed to support ethical behaviour.
First, what do we mean by ethics in business? There are many
approaches. To illustrate why ethics are not an alternative to
regulation, consider just three. You can take a deontological
approach, like that that of most religions, and impose an absolute
moral code. Something is either right or it is wrong, no exceptions.
You can see aspects of this in some corporate codes of conduct:
some things such as fraud, insider trading or forced labour are
simply prohibited, regardless of the consequences at the time.
These things are unethical everything else is OK. Because of the
inflexibility of prohibiting an action, the list tends to be a short one,
and not very useful for complex grey area situations.
In contrast, a utilitarian or consequentialist approach hinges on the
idea that the morality of any action is completely determined by its
consequences. So in its purest form, faced with a decision, you
could weigh up the impact on all parties and choose the course of
action that minimises harm or maximises good. So while stealing
might be wrong under a deontological approach, utilitarian ethics

might allow it under some circumstances, such as the theft of food


from a profitable business to save the life of a starving child. This is
pragmatic and useful, but depends on the person making the
decision having been really well trained; unless business schools
and professional institutes put serious weight behind teaching the
process of ethical decision-making, it is unreasonable to expect
individual employees to respond in the best possible way when
making snap decisions in a fast-moving and high-pressure
environment.
As a final example, a virtue-based approach to ethics comes from
Aristotles ideas of how to be, rather than what to do. A decision
on a particular situation could be reached by asking, Am I the sort
of person who would ...? or, Are we the sort of organisation
that ..? This can work really well for individuals, but wont work in
business unless everyone in the organisation is aware of and
supports the sorts of virtues or values that the firm as a whole
espouses. Since these values are not based on rules, they must
be embodied by the leaders within the organisation a kind of
ethical role-modelling which be either positive or negative,
depending on whos in charge and how they behave.
Now the question is: which of these approaches, bearing in mind
that they are only three of a myriad of ways of describing and
understanding business ethics, could credibly act as an alternative
to regulation in an industry as cut-throat and prone to moral hazard
as banking? The absolute moral code of deontological ethics is
barely compatible with capitalism, and would be either limited or
diluted by its application to profit-seeking financial innovation. The
utilitarian approach is pragmatic but time-consuming, and depends
heavily on training. Virtue-based ethics comes close to a personal
ideal, but depends on individuals to an unsustainable degree.
They are all good to have in an industry, but will never work alone.
The trouble with ethics in isolation is that unless they seem
coherent with the overall climate in which an individual is working,
he or she will lack the confidence to do the right thing even where

the right thing is clear. I might know that stealing is wrong, for
example, but if all of my peers are routinely cleaning out the
stationery cupboard and falsifying expense claims, then my
personal belief is constantly challenged by the daily experience.
This is where regulation clear rules of law with penalties and
consequences for non-compliance will support ethical standards,
reinforcing rather than replacing them.
Of course regulation also has the happy advantage of being
effective even for people who would never embrace an ethical
code. Even sociopaths fear the law. In that sense, regulation has a
wider impact than business ethics, and is a baseline if we are to
expect better corporate behaviour. Without punishments, some
people will never obey rules. But most employees are not
sociopaths, so training in ethical decision-making will also have a
useful effect, enhancing the impact of regulation, and ensuring that
it is implemented in spirit as well as in statute. What the industry
needs is not "to focus on ethics rather than regulation," but to
enforce regulation and resource ethical training. Then we might
see the change we need.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0322/314964-mahon/

O'Brien denies bribery


Digicel owner says Irish tribunal findings
flawed
Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Denis OBrien

DENIS O'Brien maintains that he never paid a former Irish


communications minister in exchange for a telephone company
licence that helped him become one of Ireland's wealthiest men.
Yesterday, the Moriarty Tribunal made public a voluminous report
from a 14-year probe, which documented Communication Minister
Michael Lowry's lobbying on behalf of telecoms tycoon O'Brien and
his alleged confidential payments to Lowry.
But O'Brien was flabbergasted that the sole member of the tribunal
conducting the probe, Justice Michael Moriarty, came to that
conclusion despite several high level officials giving testimony to
the contrary. The head of Digicel Group found the basis of the
report "fundamentally flawed", given that it is based on the
"opinions and theories" of Moriarty and his legal team.
"It is extremely disturbing that the chairman of this tribunal would
choose to ignore the sworn evidence of the Department of
Communication, Department of Finance, 17 civil servants, five
government ministers, two barristers from the Office of the Attorney
General, one former Taoiseach, one senior counsel to the Irish

State and Professor Michael Andersen, principal of AMI the


internationally-renowned world experts in this field," said O'Brien in
a written statement.
I wish to state in the most categoric terms once again that I never
made any payment to Michael Lowry in his capacity as a
government minister, as a public representative or as a private
citizen," O'Brien added.
Ireland launched the probe in 1997 after a leaked corporate report
identified Ben Dunne as a secret benefactor for Lowry and former
Prime Minister Charles Haughey.
It also examined Lowry's 1995 decision to award a telephone
company licence to O'Brien, who led the Esat Digifone Consortium
application process.
Esat Digifone quickly won 42 per cent market share, making it the
most successful second entrant in a European Union mobile
market ever. BT Telecom acquired Esat Digifone in 2000 -- the
year Digicel entered the Jamaican market.
Yesterday's 2,350-page report documented UK and Irish property
transactions conducted by Lowry and "dealings with Mr O'Brien",
which were allegedly conducted through O'Brien's agents and
associates. The report also claimed that a payment of 147,000
was made from O'Brien to Lowry in 1996, when Lowry was still in
office.
"This payment was made indirectly, having been transmitted by an
off-shore route, through Mr Aidan Phelan and the late Mr David
Austin," said the report.
The report also spoke to another alleged payment of 300,000 "the
bulk of which was used for the purchase of a property by Mr Lowry
at Mansfield, in Derbyshire in the UK".
O'Brien said he planned to study the report in detail yesterday, but
added that Moriarty made errors in the past that formed the basis
of "false theories".
"It is worth noting that the chairman of the tribunal, a High Court
Judge of many years, admitted last year to making "two not
insignificant errors", both of which had been used to substantiate
false theories," said O'Brien. "I believe it is unprecedented in the
history of this country that a High Court Judge would make such
fundamental errors which went to the heart of the credibility and
integrity of a tribunal process.
"The reason these errors were admitted was only because they
had been uncovered by the diligent work of members of the legal
profession. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the chairman makes
no reference to the concealment of crucial correspondence by the

tribunal from the office of the attorney general over an eight-year


period. It has been evident from the outset to me and to many
other witnesses before this tribunal that the final report would be
designed to damage the reputations of many reputable people. I
believe it is now incumbent on the judiciary to investigate the
conduct of Mr Justice Michael Moriarty and the tribunal legal team
for the manner in which they conducted themselves," he added.
Digicel, in a statement issued yesterday, said: "Digicel is in no way
affected or involved in the recently published report of a tribunal of
inquiry into, among other matters, the Irish Government's awarding
of the second mobile phone licence for Ireland in 1996. The
inquiry, referred to as The Moriarty Tribunal, has just completed
this phase of its work, which began in 2001. The tribunal is made
up of one member, Mr Justice Moriarty, who is expected to present
what is referred to as a "reasoned expression of opinion" relating
to the matters he has investigated. As a "reasoned expression of
opinion" the report has no legal effect or consequences. As the
owner and chairman of Digicel, Denis O'Brien has been the driving
force behind revolutionising mobile communications across the
Caribbean and the Pacific, making mobile communications
accessible to all and ensuring that customers benefit from best
value, best service and the best network. Denis' vision, drive,
energy and integrity continue to be integral to Digicel's success.
This has seen the company win and operate 32 mobile licences
across the globe. Digicel employs 5,500 people around the world
with more than 11.5 million customers, and the company's total
investments across 32 markets worldwide exceed US$4.5 billion."
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/business/O-Brien-deniesbribery_8567642

Supreme Court: allegations of


ministerial corruption should
not be struck out on a
technicality
Chief Justice Denham said it is a matter of public interest as to whether
Michael Lowry corrupted a State process.
Oct 17th 2012

File photo: Michael Lowry with Denis O'Brien back in 1997


Image: Eamonn Farrell/Photocall Ireland

/Photo Text content


A SUPREME COURT judge has said that if the allegations
contained in the report of the Moriarty Tribunal were to be
established in an Irish court, they would be the most
serious factual determinations since the foundation of the
State.
Delivered by Justice Frank Clarke, the remarks were
included in a Supreme Court ruling which will allow two
unsuccessful bidders for Irelands second mobile phone

licence to challenge the States decision to grant it to Esat


Digifone in 1995.
The three presiding judges cleared the way for the appeals,
citing public interest and the unique and distinguishable
nature of the case as relevant factors.
The losing competitors allege that money was paid by Esat
Digifones Denis OBrien both directly and indirectly to the
then-Minister for Public Enterprise Michael Lowry during
the competition process.
Chief Justice Susan Denham ruled that the balance of
justice is in favour of the case proceeding. She said she
came to the decision after taking a number of factors into
account, including the fact that these proceedings make
serious allegations of corruption by a Minister of the
Government not a matter which should be struct out on
a technicality but which should be addressed in a full
hearing in open court.
In submissions it was argued by the State that the
appellants actions were not in the public interest, but
were private commercial interests.
However, this is not a case between private companies,
rather it involves allegations of corruption by a Minister of
State. There is a public interest in determining such a
claim of corruption in high office. It is a matter of public
interest as to whether a Minister of Government corrupted
a State process. This is an important aspect of the case.
Denham mention of a technicality refers to the States
motions to dismiss the proceedings on the grounds of
inordinate and inexcusable delay. Those orders were
originally perfected by the High Court in 2007 but
overturned by the Supreme Court in July.
Covert and concealed wrongdoing
Because of the unique nature of the case, the judges sided
with Persona and Comcast who argued the delay in
bringing forward proceedings was excusable and
legitimate because they were waiting for developments at
the Moriarty Tribunal. They believe they could not have
formulated a statement of claim without the details which

emerged during the nine-year probe.


The three-judge court said the case brought up a question
of covert wrongdoing, which is unusual when compared
to most other civil suits in which the plaintiff can plead
their own case.
Persons injured in accidents, whether on the roads or in
the workplace, will normally be able to give a reasonable
account of how the accident occurred, Justice Clarke
said. The problem with covert wrongdoing is, of course
that it is covert. A person who suffers from covert
wrongdoing may have little or no direct knowledge of the
wrongdoing.
The allegation made is of highly covert activity, added
Clarke.
Justice Fennelly said that while ordinarily he would have
been inclined to dismiss the claims of all plaintiffs on the
grounds of an inordinate and inexcusable delay, the
present case is distinguishable.
They have convincingly argued that any private litigant
without the investigative powers of the Moriarty Tribunal
would not have been able to uncover the materials
necessary to make their claims.
As Hardiman says in his judgement, the corruption
alleged in this case was covert, devious and concealed.
Chief Justice Denham added that the case provided an
exception to the rule that plaintiffs should not be able to
decide unilaterally not to proceed a case for a particular
time and reason.
Reaction from Lowry and OBrien
Although the Supreme Court decision was revealed during
the summer, the reasoning behind it was published for the
first time today.
In July, both Lowry and OBrien welcomed the ruling.
The Tipperary deputy said that he has always advocated
that a court of law is the proper forum to critically probe
the process which led to the licence being granted.
Shortly after the licence was granted and the losing
consortia started a campaign to undermine the process, I

as then Minister invited and encouraged the losing bidders


to seek a judicial review of the process, continued Lowry.
They declined that request.
I welcome the fact that 17 years later the Supreme Court is
granting them the opportunity to have that decision tested
in lawI am happy that the losing consortias court
challenge will be governed by strict rules of evidence
where facts must be established, where the sworn evidence
of those who know the facts such as more than 17 civil
servants and all others involved in the process will have to
be accurately adjudicated on to the exclusion of hearsay
and opinion.
Lowry concluded that the claims about how the licence
was awarded are without merit or substance and should
be vigorously defended by the State.
In a similarly worded statement, OBrien said he is
absolutely satisfied that the allegations being pursued
will be demonstrated to be devoid of evidence and
substance.
He added that he welcomes the opportunity to fully defend
all allegations made in relation to the licence competition
process.
Esat Digifone Limited won for the very simple reason that
it submitted the best bid, according to OBrien.
The Moriarty Report
The circumstances of the awarding of the licence was
subject to scrutiny during the nine-year Moriarty Tribunal.
In 2001, Comcast International Holdings Incorporated
and Persona Digital Telephony Ltd brought actions against
the State, Esat Digifone and its chairman Denis OBrien.
In 2007, the High Court stopped the cases because of
inordinate and inexcusable delay in prosecuting them.
However, lawyers for both consortia argued that they were
entitled to wait until the Moriarty Tribunal report before
proceeding.
The Moriarty Report, published in March last year,
criticised Lowrys role in the awarding of the licence to
Esat Digifone. Justice Michael Moriarty said that Lowry

was far from a disinterested Minister who exerted


insidious and pervasive influence on the process.
http://www.thejournal.ie/supreme-court-denis-o-brien-michael-lowry639433-Oct2012/

Comcast International Holdings Inc. & ors -v- Minister for


Public Enterprise & ors; Persona Digital Telephony Ltd &
anor -v- Minister for Public Enterprise & ors
Neutral Citation:
[2012] IESC 50
Supreme Court Record Number:
213, 215 & 216/07
High Court Record Number:
2001 9223P, 2001 15119P & 2001 9228P
Date of Delivery:
10/17/2012
Court:
Supreme Court
Composition of Court:
Denham C.J., Hardiman J., Fennelly J., McKechnie J., Clarke
J.
Judgment by:
Clarke J.
Status:
Approved
Judgment
Information Note
THE SUPREME COURT
[Appeal No: 213/2007]
Denham C.J.
Hardiman J.
Fennelly J.
McKechnie J.
Clarke J.
Between/
Persona Digital Telephony Limited and Sigma Wireless
Networks Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and

The Minister for Public Enterprise, Ireland and the Attorney


General
Defendants/Respondents
THE SUPREME COURT
[Appeals Nos: 215/2007 and 216/2007]

Between/
Comcast International Incorporated, Declan Ganley,
Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
The Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis O'Brien, Ireland and
the Attorney General
Defendants/Respondents
Judgment of Mr. Justice Clarke delivered the 17th of
October, 2012.
1
Introduction
1.1 The events surrounding the award of a GSM mobile
telephone licence by the Minister for Public Enterprise in
1995 have been a matter of very significant public
controversy for well over a decade now. Those events
have been the subject of investigation by, and the report
of, what is commonly referred to as the Moriarty Tribunal.
As is widely known Esat Telecommunications Limited
("Esat"), the third named defendant in the proceedings
brought by Comcast International Incorporated along with
three other parties (collectively "Comcast", and the
"Comcast proceedings" respectively), was successful in
the competition which led to the grant of the licence in
question. Comcast was one of its losing competitors.
Likewise the first named plaintiff in the other proceedings
which are the subject of these appeals, Persona Digital
Telephony Limited, who is joined by a co-plaintiff in its

action (collectively "Persona" and the "Persona


proceedings" respectively), was another unsuccessful
competitor. Comcast, Persona and the other plaintiffs have
initiated these proceedings with a view, amongst other
things, to seeking damages arising out of what was said to
have been misfeasance of public office, deceit and fraud in
the way in which that competition was conducted.
1.2 It can, I think, be said that if the allegations which are
made in these proceedings, and which formed the subject
of the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal, were to be
established in a court of competent jurisdiction, they
would amount to amongst the most serious factual
determinations made by a court in this jurisdiction since
the foundation of the State. The allegations involve the
assertion that the second named defendant in the
Comcast proceedings ("Mr. Lowry"), who held the office of
Minister for Public Enterprise at the time of the
competition, was paid money by the fourth named
defendant in the Comcast proceedings ("Mr. O'Brien") in
order to influence the competition. It is alleged that such
monies were paid both directly and indirectly and that Mr.
Lowry, as Minister, did, in return for those monies, actually
influence the competition in order to procure that Esat
should win.
1.3 However, this court is not now concerned with the
substance of those allegations. In circumstances to which
it will be necessary to refer in due course, the first named
defendant in both proceedings (the Minister) applied to
the High Court to dismiss both the Comcast and the
Persona proceedings for want of prosecution, delay and on
the basis of the court's inherent jurisdiction to dismiss
proceedings when there is a serious risk that any trial
would be unfair. Those applications came on for hearing
before Gilligan J. who made the order sought on behalf of
the Minister in both proceedings. It should be noted that
the non-State parties in the Comcast proceedings,
namely Mr. Lowry, Esat and Mr. OBrien, did not participate
in the Ministers application. Comcast, Persona and their
associated plaintiffs separately appealed to this court
against the judgment and order of Gilligan J.. This court

has already ruled that the appeals be allowed and that the
order dismissing both proceedings be reversed. I support
the decision of this court in that regard. However, it was
indicated that reasons would be given at a later date. This
judgment is directed to the issues which arise on those
appeals and to my reasons for supporting the ruling of this
court. The backdrop to these appeals is the sequence of
events giving rise to both proceedings and the progress of
those proceedings once commenced. As much of the
relevant factual background is dealt with in other
judgments I will turn only briefly to the history of relevant
events.
2
The History of Events
2.1 There are detailed accounts of the facts to be found
in the judgments of Denham C.J., Hardiman J. and
McKechnie J. Those judgments set out a full account of the
proceedings and their, admittedly limited, procedural
history. Background facts are also set out. In addition there
is an analysis of the progress of the Moriarty Tribunal
insofar as it dealt with the issues concerning the award of
the GSM licence. In those circumstances it is unnecessary
to repeat those accounts in this judgment.
2.2 However, there are a few additional facts which are,
in my view, of some limited relevance to the issues which
require to be determined in these appeals. Those facts will
be dealt with as they arise in the context of a discussion of
the issues debated on this appeal.
2.3 Against that background it is necessary to turn to the
test by reference to which the court ought to consider
whether to dismiss civil proceedings on the basis of delay,
on the one hand, or in furtherance of its inherent
jurisdiction to ensure a fair trial, on the other hand; it
being recalled that the Minister sought the dismissal of
both of these proceedings on both of those grounds and
that Gilligan J. acceded to the Minister's application in both
cases on both grounds. I turn first to the test applicable
where it is sought to dismiss proceedings for delay.
3.
Dismissal For Delay The Test
3.1 In one sense it can be said that the overall approach
is well settled. In Desmond v M.G.N. Limited [2009] 1 I.R.

737, at p.749, Macken J. (who was part of the majority of


this court in that case) adopted the tests which I had
mentioned in Stephens v. Flynn Limited [2005] IEHC 148
being:"1. ascertain whether the delay in question is inordinate
and inexcusable; and
2.
if it is so established the court must decide where the
balance of justice lies."
3.2 In formulating the test in that way I had followed a
long line of authority stretching back to the decisions of
this court in Rainsford v. Limerick Corporation [1995] 2
I.L.R.M. 561 and Primor plc v. Stokes Kennedy Crowley
[1996] 2 I.R. 459. I did not understand counsel on either
side of these appeals to suggest that those tests were not
the applicable tests. In addition I do not understand any of
the recent jurisprudence in this area to question that those
tests represent the appropriate questions to be considered
by the court.
3.3. However, it does have to be accepted that there has
been what might, at a minimum, be considered to have
been a difference of emphasis apparent from certain
recent judgments in both this court and in the High Court,
as to the manner in which those tests should be applied
and in particular whether there was to be, as I put it in
Stephens v. Flynn Limited, a re-calibration or as others
have described it, a tightening up, in the application of
those tests.
3.4 That recent jurisprudence goes back to the judgment
of Hardiman J. in this court in Gilroy v. Flynn [2005] 1
I.L.R.M. 290. That judgment suggested that the courts had
become ever more conscious of the unfairness of, and
increased possibility of injustice which attached to,
allowing an action which depends on witness testimony to
proceed a considerable time after the cause of action had
accrued. The judgment also noted the decisions of the
European Court of Human Rights ("the ECtHR"), in cases
such as McMullen v. Ireland (Application no. 42297/98,
29th July, 2004) [2004] ECHR 42297/98, and the
obligation, independent of the actions of the parties, on

the courts to ensure that civil litigation is determined


within a reasonable time. Hardiman J. also noted then
recent changes in the Rules of the Superior Courts which
appear to place a greater obligation on the courts not to
excuse, save in special circumstances, repeated
procedural failures on the part of litigants.
3.5 Relying on those matters I expressed the view in
Stephens v. Flynn, in a passage immediately after that
setting out the tests approved of by Macken J. in
Desmond, that:"[I]t seems to me that for the reasons set out by the
Supreme Court in Gilroy the calibration of the weight to be
attached to various factors in the assessment of the
balance of justice and, indeed, the length of time which
might be considered to give rise to an inordinate delay or
the matters which might go to excuse such delay are
issues which may need to be significantly re-assessed and
adjusted in the light of the conditions now prevailing.
Delay which would have been tolerated may now be
regarded as inordinate. Excuses which sufficed may no
longer be accepted. The balance of justice may be tilted in
favour of imposing greater obligation of expedition and
against requiring the same level of prejudice as
heretofore."
3.6 That reasoning was upheld by this court in an appeal
in Stephens v. Paul Flynn Limited [2008] 4 I.R. 31.
3.7 However, the need for recalibration or tightening up
was questioned to some extent in Desmond where
Geoghegan J. (also part of the majority) indicated that he
was not convinced that it was necessary to revisit the
principles set out in Primor and Rainsford.
3.8 In the light of the, at least potentially, conflicting
jurisprudence on the question of whether there ought
properly be a re-calibration or tightening up of the criteria
by reference to which the actions or inactions of parties
might be judged, I suggested an overall approach in
Rodenhuis and Verloop B.V. v. HDS Energy Ltd. [2011] 1
I.R. 611, at pp.616-617, in these terms:-

"As long as it remains the case that the procedure in this


jurisdiction is left largely in the hands of the parties, then
it follows that the pace at which litigation will progress will
be highly dependent on the initiative shown by those
parties. To the extent that it becomes clear that parties
will be significantly indulged even though they engage in
delay, then that fact is only likely to encourage delay. If
parties feel they can get away with it, and if that feeling is
justified by the response of the courts, then there is likely
to be more delay. It seems to me, therefore, that it is
necessary, in a system where the initiative is left largely
up to the parties to progress proceedings, for the courts to
make clear that there will not be an excessive indulgence
of delay, because if the courts do not make that clear, it
follows that the courts actions will encourage delay and,
thus, will encourage a situation where cases will not be
completed within the sort of times which would be
consistent with compliance with Irelands obligations
under the European Convention on Human Rights.
As I pointed out it is correct to say that there is no
jurisprudence of the [ECtHR] dealing with the
circumstances in which proceedings must be dismissed for
delay. However, it does seem to me that if the courts in a
common law jurisdiction, and in the absence of case
management for any particular category of case, to use
the words of Hardiman J., endlessly indulge delay then
that fact is only likely to increase delay and increase a
failure to comply with Irelands Convention obligations. It
seems to me that that analysis justifies the view which I
expressed in [Stephens] (and which was approved of by
the division of the Supreme Court which heard the appeal
in that case) which was to the effect that there needed to
be a tightening up or recalibration of the application of the
long established principles in the delay jurisprudence,
without altering the tests to be applied.
For those reasons it seems to me that the tightening up to
which I referred in Stephens is an appropriate course of
action for the courts to adopt. It does not seem to me that
there is any clear or authoritative view from the Supreme
Court which would bind me to take a different view. I
therefore propose to apply the test which I identified in

[Stephens] and which was approved of by Macken J.,


speaking for the majority in [Desmond], but with the
tightening up to which I referred in the very next
paragraph of my judgment in [Stephens]."
3.9 I see no reason to depart from the views which I
expressed in Roddenhuis. The overall test remains the
same. That has been the consistent position adopted in all
the cases. However, it seems to me that the factors first
identified by Hardiman J. in Gilroy do require that the
application of that test be approached on a significantly
less indulgent basis than heretofore.
3.10 However, I should express my agreement with a
number of the observations made on this question by
McKechnie J. in his judgment in this case. First, I agree
fully with the comments made by reference to Guerin v.
Guerin [1993] I.L.R.M. 243. The circumstances of the
parties and, in particular, any disparity in the resources
available to the parties must always be a factor which the
court takes into account. The degree of expedition and
compliance with time limits which could properly be
expected of large corporations involved in commercial
disputes cannot reasonably be required of poorly
resourced or otherwise disadvantaged litigants who may
have to resort for representation to small law firms
frequently accepting instructions without any guarantee of
payment. Any legitimate tightening up must give all due
consideration to the difficulties with which such parties are
faced in progressing litigation which can, in many cases,
be of significant importance to the party concerned.
3.11 Second, I agree with the views expressed by
McKechnie J. as to the need to apply any heightened
standards of expedition to defendants as well. If the true
rationale for a tightening up is the need for a more timeconscious regime to ensure that proceedings are
determined in a timely fashion, then it follows that the
need for such a regime places obligations on defendants
as well. The problem with which courts in a common law
system is faced is that, in the absence of active judicial
case management, the pace at which litigation is to
progress is left largely in the hands of the parties. While

active case management has been introduced in certain


categories of cases in recent times, it may not be
practicable to provide such case management in all cases.
Indeed a high level of (costly) management may not be
suitable for all types of cases and in all circumstances.
There will, therefore, remain cases where the pace of
litigation does lie, to a significant extent, in the hands of
the parties. But, as McKechnie J. points out, that fact
places obligations on defendants as well. The Rules of
Court provide various mechanisms which allow a
defendant, who is concerned by the slow pace of litigation,
to seek to have the process accelerated. A defendant who
does not avail of those procedures is, in my view, in a
different position from a defendant who has sought to
speed up the process but has been frustrated in that
endeavour by a failure on the part of the relevant plaintiff
to respond reasonably.
3.12 Finally, I would also agree with McKechnie J. that,
while a gold standard of practice must always be striven
for, it would be unjust to regard a party who, in all the
circumstances, had acted with reasonable expedition, as
having been guilty of inordinate delay simply because the
standards of expedition demonstrated do not measure up
to the very highest standards of best practice.
3.13 With those observations in mind I do, however,
remain of the view that tightening up is required. While
the court will, understandably, be concerned to balance
the interests of justice arising in the case before it and, in
that regard, to consider all relevant facts, nonetheless the
overall approach of the courts, if unduly lax, has the
potential to create injustice by delay across a whole range
of cases whose facts may never come to be considered by
a judge, but whose progress is adversely affected by a
culture of delay.
3.14 It is next necessary to turn to the test by reference to
which proceedings may be dismissed, even in the absence
of fault, as a result of the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
4.
Unfairness The Test
4.1 That there is a separate line of authority suggesting

that there are circumstances in which proceedings can be


dismissed for delay, even though there is no culpability on
the part of the plaintiff concerned, cannot doubted. Those
authorities were analysed by Gilligan J. in his judgment in
this case between pp.40 and 45. Towards the end of p.45
Gilligan J. concluded, correctly in my view, that, whilst in
some of the cases there was something of a conflation
between arguments relying on prejudice caused by
inordinate and inexcusable delay, on the one hand, and
simple unfairness, on the other hand, there remains a
separate jurisdiction in the court to dismiss if there is a
real prospect that the defendant will not be able to have a
fair trial or that it would be unfair to require the defendant
to meet the case after such a long delay.
4.2 For the reasons which I addressed in my judgment in
Kennedy v. D.P.P. [2012] IESC 34 (although that case was
concerned with prohibition in the criminal context), I am
concerned to ensure that proceedings should be tried on
the merits in all cases where no blame can lie on the party
bringing the proceedings (plaintiff or prosecutor) save
where there is a high degree of assurance that the
relevant defendant will not be able to get a fair trial or will
suffer serious unfairness. Nevertheless, for reasons which
will become apparent, it does not seem to me that the
facts of this case demonstrate the sort of prejudice or
impairment to the Minister in the conduct of his defence
which would meet the test in any of the ways in which it
has been characterised in the jurisprudence. This case is
not, therefore and as should become clear in the course of
this judgment, one in which it is necessary to address with
some precision the precise test which is to be applied in
dismissing a case where there is no blameworthy delay on
the part of the plaintiff.
4.3 However, I should make one general observation. It
seems to me that the threshold which must be
surmounted to justify the dismissal of proceedings where
there is no culpable delay on the part of the plaintiff must
necessarily be more onerous than that which applies in
the case of culpable delay. If the thresholds were the same
then the jurisprudence on delay in such cases would be

meaningless for the level of impairment in the ability to


present a defence which would have to be shown would be
the same whether there was or was not culpable delay.
Furthermore, a test which made it easier to dismiss
proceedings where there was no culpable delay would be
illogical. It follows, in my view, that whatever approach is
adopted to the dismissal of cases where no culpable delay
is established, it must, necessarily, require that a higher
threshold be met. The rationale behind the existence of
two separate bases for dismissal is that there will be some
cases where the degree of unfairness to a defendant
(whether because of severe impairment in the ability to
mount a defence or other factors) may be so great the
even a blameless plaintiff may have to suffer their
proceedings being dismissed.
4.4 Having dealt with the relevant tests I now turn to a
consideration of whether the Minister is entitled to have
both of these proceedings dismissed for inordinate and
inexcusable delay in accordance with the jurisprudence to
which I have referred.
5.
Delay
5.1 As pointed out earlier, the first leg of the relevant
test is as to whether a plaintiff can be said to have been
guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay. There was no
question but that Persona, Comcast and the other
plaintiffs (collectively "Persona and Comcast") were guilty
of inordinate delay. Neither plaintiff contested that
allegation. It is, indeed, impossible to see how any contest
could have been raised. The delay between the issuing of
the relevant proceedings and the filing of the statements
of claim was of the order of five years. Delays of much
shorter periods have been found to represent inordinate
delay. Even in complicated cases, where the formulation of
a detailed statement of claim would undoubtedly take
some time, delays of a fraction of five years have been
considered inordinate.
5.2 In addition it is clear from cases such as Birkett v.
James [1977] 2 All E.R. 801 (as adopted in both the High
Court and this court in Stephens v. Paul Flynn Limited) that
a party who starts their proceedings late, while within the

relevant period provided for in the Statute of Limitations,


bears an added burden of progressing their proceedings
with expedition. The point is that the period within which
proceedings have to be commenced is laid down by
statute. It is not for the courts to second guess the choice
of period provided for by the Oireachtas. However, the
courts role in ensuring a fair and just resolution of
proceedings requires that all reasonable steps are taken to
ensure that the gap between the events which are the
subject of a trial and the trial itself is no longer than might
be considered reasonable in the context of the limitation
period provided for by the Oireachtas for that type of
claim. Therefore, where a claim is started promptly, some
greater degree of latitude may be allowed as to its pace of
progress (everything else being equal) compared with a
claim which is brought just as the limitation period is
about to run out so that the period from cause of action to
trial is going to be lengthy in any event. As noted in the
judgment of Hardiman J., these proceedings were
commenced at the very extremity of the limitation period
and would, therefore, have been required to have been
progressed with extra expedition. The fact that the
respective proceedings were served at the limit of the
period allowed by the rules for service and thus well
outside the limitation period only adds to that
requirement. Inordinate delay is, therefore, clear.
5.3 Whether the first leg of the test is met, therefore,
turns on whether the undoubtedly inordinate delay which
occurred can also be said to be inexcusable. Both Persona
and Comcast rely on substantially the same and single
excuse. It is said that it was necessary to await
developments at the Moriarty Tribunal in order that the
respective claims could be properly formulated and
pleaded at all. In those circumstances it is said that, in the
very unusual situation which arose in this case, an
undoubtedly inordinate delay is excusable.
5.4 The first leg of the test, therefore, turns on whether
that explanation provides an adequate excuse for the
delay in question.

5.5 Before going on to deal with that issue it seems to


me to be appropriate to make a number of observations.
First, there is the question of covert wrongdoing. In many
cases a plaintiff wishing to pursue civil proceedings will,
either of that party's own knowledge, or with the
assistance of known witnesses of fact or experts whom
that party can employ, have sufficient information
available to it to be able to plead their case. Persons
injured in accidents, whether on the roads or in the
workplace, will normally be able to give a reasonable
account of how the accident occurred such that their
lawyers can formulate a claim on their behalf in
negligence if that be stateable. Likewise, experts such as
engineers or doctors can be employed to provide
necessary detail if required. Similarly, parties aggrieved, in
the commercial context, with those with whom they have
contractual relations will normally, from their own
knowledge, be able to specify the terms of any relevant
contract and, at least generally, be able to set out any
alleged breaches and their consequences. It may, of
course, be the case that such parties will require the aid of
procedural measures such as discovery or interrogatories
in order to be able to present their case to its best
advantage at trial. Evidence or lines of inquiry may be
suggested which may lead to a stronger case. However, it
would be rare in such cases that the party would not be
able to formulate their claim in any meaningful way.
5.6 However, different considerations may well arise
(although not necessarily in all cases) where an allegation
is made of covert wrongdoing. The problem with covert
wrongdoing is, of course, that it is covert. A person who
suffers from covert wrongdoing may have little or no direct
knowledge of the wrongdoing. In some, perhaps many,
cases a party may entertain a suspicion of, for example,
fraudulent or anti-competitive behaviour which is said to
have operated to their detriment. However, a suspicion
that could lead to no more than a vague generalised
allegation could not provide a proper basis for
commencing proceedings. As was noted in discussion
between the court and counsel during the appeals in this
case, it will often be as a result of some event over which

an aggrieved party had no control or influence that


information may become available such as would allow
such a party to turn a mere suspicion of covert
wrongdoing into a stateable allegation. Inquiries by public
authorities (including prosecution authorities) may
sometimes provide the necessary detail. Whistleblowers
may bring information into the public domain. A party may
chance upon some useful material capable of turning a
suspicion into an allegation. The important point to
emphasise is that persons who wish to make an allegation
of covert wrongdoing will inevitably face difficulties in
being able to formulate a claim. It seems to me that all
due allowance needs to be made for that fact in assessing
cases where delay is alleged in claims of covert
wrongdoing.
5.7 That being said, the difficulties which such parties
may encounter cannot be allowed to be an excuse for
procedural inaction. It is equally the case that persons
facing the kind of serious allegations which are frequently
at the heart of covert wrongdoing claims are just as
entitled as any other party facing a serious allegation to
have the allegation concerned heard and determined in a
timely manner. A party bringing a claim for covert
wrongdoing cannot just sit on its hands and hope that
something will turn up. Such a party is obliged to take all
reasonable steps to progress their claim. However, the
speed at which the claim progresses must be judged,
provided that all reasonable steps are taken, against the
backdrop that it may, nonetheless, be difficult to progress
such a claim in as expeditious a way as the type of claim
where most of the information necessary for the
formulation of the claim in question will be available to the
claimant.
5.8 Second, it seems to me that a party, who wishes to
adopt what might, in ordinary circumstances, be
considered to be an unorthodox approach to litigation
(such as by putting the proceedings on hold pending some
event), is required to, at a minimum, place on record with
all other parties to the litigation, that that course of action
is being adopted. It does not seem to me that it is

legitimate for a party to adopt an unorthodox approach to


litigation on a unilateral basis. Indeed, it was the failure of
the plaintiff in Desmond v. M.G.N. to inform the defendant
that it was intended to await developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal that led this court to view the explanation given
as not being sufficient to excuse the delay in question.
While Desmond v. M.G.N. and this case involved a party
who was in the unusual circumstances of electing to await
developments at a public tribunal of inquiry, it seems to
me that the overall principle is more far-reaching. A party
who is likely to have to spend a much longer period than
might ordinarily and reasonably be expected in preparing
court documents or in preparing to take an important step
in proceedings (such as serving a notice of trial or
certifying the case as being ready) because of delays
being encountered in, for example, procuring expert
reports, has, in my view, an obligation to bring those
difficulties to the attention of all other parties.
5.9 In different contexts it has often been said that
litigation is a two-way process. However, it seems to me
that all parties are entitled contemporaneously to
reasonable disclosure of an intention to adopt an
unorthodox approach which is likely to lead to a delay of a
significant variety in the progress of litigation. It seems to
me that much greater weight ought legitimately be placed
on explanations which are tendered contemporaneously
thus affording other parties a reasonable opportunity to
take whatever steps may be considered appropriate in the
event that it is considered that the proposed unorthodox
course of action is not justifiable. Unorthodox action
signalled contemporaneously and not contested at the
time is likely to be more readily accepted by the court as
providing an excuse than the same action taken
unilaterally and only referred to after the event as
retrospectively providing an explanation.
5.10 Against that backdrop it is necessary to turn to the
facts of these cases. In that context there is a slight
difference between the respective plaintiffs. I will deal with
that difference in due course. However, as pointed out, the
broad excuse tendered is the same. It is accepted that the

proceedings were only issued at the last minute so as to


ensure that the Statute of Limitations did not run. Both
plaintiffs seemed to suggest that suspicions about the
integrity of the licence awarding process were held from
the beginning. However, it does not seem on the evidence
currently before the court that those suspicions could have
matured into anything more than a mere suspicion until
certain matters came into the public domain in the period
immediately prior to the expiry of the limitation period.
One such matter was a newspaper report which suggested
that a company which formed part of the winning
consortium had made a significant party political donation
at or around the time when the licence process was afoot.
The second, and it would appear connected, development
was the announcement by the Moriarty Tribunal that it
intended to inquire into the award of the GSM licence. On
the evidence currently available it does not seem to me to
be unfair to characterise those events as being ones which
could reasonably cause a mere suspicion to mature into an
at least stateable allegation.
5.11 However, at the time both proceedings commenced it
does not seem to me that either plaintiff would have had
available to it anything remotely like sufficient information
to formulate a detailed statement of claim. It is in that
context that both Persona and Comcast say that it was
legitimate for them to await developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal so as to place them in a position where they
would be able to formulate a statement of claim. At the
level of principle it seems to me that Persona and Comcast
are correct in that regard. The allegation made is of highly
covert activity. There was no reasonable basis on which
either Person or Comcast could have been expected to
have had sufficient information to formulate a statement
of claim in any meaningful way at the time their
respective proceedings were issued. There is, in my view,
a significant difference between having sufficient
information to justify issuing proceedings in circumstances
which would not amount to an abuse of process, on the
one hand, and having sufficient information to be able to
formulate a claim in a detailed way, on the other.

5.12 Against that general proposition, however, the


Minister makes a number of arguments. It is said that
there were courses of action available to both Persona and
Comcast which could, and it is said should, have been
adopted in the light of the undoubted obligation which
rested on Persona and Comcast, having regard to their
very late commencement of proceedings, to progress with
all possible expedition.
5.13 First, it is said that pre-statement of claim discovery
of documents could have been sought. While there are,
undoubtedly, circumstances in which the court has a
jurisdiction to depart from the normal procedure of
allowing discovery only when the issues between the
parties have been knit by the exchange of pleadings, I am
not convinced on the facts of this case that pre-statement
of claim discovery could have appeared to Comcast or
Persona as being likely to supply them with the necessary
information to formulate their claims. Doubtless any
documents held by the Department of Public Enterprise,
arising out of the award process, could have been sought.
However, the key information concerning the very serious
allegations of wrongdoing, which are at the heart of these
proceedings, involved a money trail. One should, of
course, avoid over-reliance on hindsight. Nevertheless, it
is clear that establishing the series of transactions which,
in the view of the Moriarty Tribunal, demonstrated monies
being paid to Mr. Lowry, involved a significant degree of
forensic disclosure from financial institutions and others
with the benefit of the significant powers of compellability
which are available to a tribunal of inquiry. Even without
the benefit of that hindsight it seems to me that it was not
unreasonable for Persona and Comcast to conclude that
discovery was unlikely to produce the necessary detail and
that it was much more likely that any such detail would, if
it existed, become available through the tribunal.
5.14 The second and third matters relied on by the
Minister are the suggestions that Persona and Comcast
could have either applied to the court to stay their own
proceedings pending developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal or, alternatively, ought at least to have indicated

to the Minister that it was their intention to "park" the


proceedings pending such developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal and thus enabling the Minister to take whatever
action might have been considered appropriate in those
circumstances.
5.15 It seems to me that both of those factors can be
considered together. It is true that there have been come
cases (such as Doe v. Armour Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. [1994] 3 I.R. 78) where the court has allowed a
plaintiff to put its own proceedings on hold (by granting a
stay). However, most of those cases involved parties who
had other proceedings in being (perhaps in another
jurisdiction) which it was suggested ought to be decided
first or where a challenge existed to the entitlement of
another jurisdiction to determine certain issues and where
the Irish proceedings were a fallback to preserve the
plaintiff's position in the event that the challenge to the
foreign court's jurisdiction was successful. None of the
cases cited in argument came close to the circumstances
which existed in these cases. However, that leads to the
third point. Whether or not Persona and Comcast could
have been proactive and sought to stay their own
proceedings, I am satisfied, for the reasons already
analysed, that it is not appropriate for a party to take the
unorthodox step of, in effect, "parking" proceedings
without at least making some attempt to raise that
question with the other parties to the relevant litigation.
Subject to one matter which arises only in the context of
the Persona proceedings, no attempt so to do was made
by either plaintiff in these proceedings. This is an issue to
which I will return.
5.16 Finally, attention is drawn by the Minister to the fact
that, long before the statements of claim in these
proceedings were filed, counsel on behalf of the Moriarty
Tribunal had, as is the normal practice, given a lengthy
opening statement at the commencement of the module
of the tribunal which was concerned with the award of the
GSM licence. On that basis it is said that, at least from that
time, there was significant information available to both
plaintiffs which would have allowed the formulation of a

statement of claim in, it is said, much the same form as


the statements of claim which were ultimately filed. It is in
that context appropriate to note that, in reality, the
statements of claim only came to be filed when motions
were brought which had the effect of compelling the
delivery of statements of claim on risk of the respective
proceedings being struck out. I will also return to this
issue.
5.17 It seems to me that there is some substance to the
State's argument under the latter two headings just
referred to.
5.18 In that context, it is, however, important to note
three countervailing factors which have some influence on
an overall assessment of those issues. First, attention was
drawn to the fact that a warning letter was sent by the
Minister to the solicitors for Persona which gave a period
of 21 days within which to file a statement of claim in
default of which an application to "strike out these
proceedings for want of prosecution" was threatened. The
statement of claim in those proceedings was, in fact, filed
within that period of 21 days.
5.19 There are two express provisions to be found in the
rules which allow for an application to dismiss for want of
prosecution. The more general provision is to be found in
O.122, r.11 which says the following:"[] In any cause or matter in which there has been no
proceeding for two years from the last proceeding had, the
defendant may apply to the court to dismiss the same for
want of prosecution, and on the hearing of such
application the Court may order the cause or matter to be
dismissed accordingly or may make such order and on
such terms as to the Court may seem just.[]"
5.20 A more specific provision is found in O.27 which
applies in circumstances where a statement of claim is not
filed in the time required by the rules and where, in cases
such as those with which this judgment is concerned and
involving a claim for unliquidated damages in contract or
tort, the moving party is required to write a preliminary

letter which offers an extension of time.


5.21 It may be that it is also possible to invoke the courts
inherent jurisdiction to dismiss in the case of inordinate
and inexcusable delay even in cases which are not
governed by the two specific rules to which reference has
been made. In that context it is relevant to note paras. 1573 of Delaney and McGrath Civil Procedure in the Superior
Courts (3rd Edition Thomson Round Hall 2012) and the
reference therein to the decision of this court in Collins v
Dublin Bus (Unrep., Supreme Court, Murphy J., 22nd
October, 1999).
5.22 Under the rules, therefore, a claim to dismiss for
want of prosecution arises either where the statement of
claim is not filed on time, in which case an opportunity to
file within 21 days must be given, or where there has been
no action for two years. In the latter case no offer of an
extension of time need be made. An application to dismiss
for inordinate and inexcusable delay may also arise under
the court's inherent jurisdiction in other circumstances.
5.23 It is clear, therefore, that the Minister had a number
of options available to him. It is certainly the case that the
Minister could have moved under O.122 for it is clear that
a period of much more than two years had elapsed with no
proceeding. It may also be that the Minister could also
have moved under the inherent jurisdiction. It is
interesting to note that the motion brought by the Minister
in the Persona proceedings seeks, in the alternative, an
order "pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of this
Honourable Court dismissing the within proceedings as
against the defendants for delay and/or want of
prosecution" and an order "pursuant to the inherent
jurisdiction of this Honourable Court dismissing the within
proceedings as against the defendants in the interests of
justice". No specific provision of the Rules of Court is
referred to. It is not clear, therefore, as to whether the
Minister actually considered that he was proceeding under
O.27. Certainly the fact that a warning letter of the type
that is required, by the rules, to be sent in advance of
making an application to dismiss for want of prosecution
under O.27 was written. However, be that as it may, it is

clear that the Minister had a number of options open to


him at the time when it was decided to write to Persona.
Even if the Minister considered moving under O.27 (which
would, as has been pointed out, have required the writing
of a letter extending time for 21 days) the Minister could
have chosen an alternative means of action.
5.24 It seems to me that O.27 r.1 and r.1A are primarily
designed as a method of speeding up proceedings even
though the form of the order which may ultimately be
sought, is to dismiss for want of prosecution. That
situation is analogous to that which now pertains under
O.27 r. 8 where, in the cases to which that rule applies, a
plaintiff is required to write a similar letter extending time
for defence prior to initiating a motion for judgment in
default of defence. While the ultimate order which would
be sought in the absence of the defence being filed within
the extended period granted by the letter is an order for
judgment nonetheless the primary purpose of the order is
to provide a mechanism whereby the filing of a defence
may be speeded up rather than the proceedings brought
to an end.
5.25 There can be little doubt, therefore, that by choosing
to write a letter extending time (whether because of a
desire to move under O.27 or otherwise) the Minister
would have conveyed the impression to Persona that he
was more concerned with ensuring that the proceedings
were now moved along after a period of inaction rather
than that the Minister desired to bring the proceedings to
an end. While it does not seem to me that such an action
on the part of the Minister creates a formal estoppel
preventing the Minister from thereafter moving to dismiss
(in the absence of further significant delay) and while I
would not go so far as McKechnie J. in treating the
Minister's actions as an abuse sufficient to debar the
Minister from seeking to have the Persona proceedings
dismissed, nonetheless the choice by the Minister to write
the letter extending time seems to me to be a factor to
which some very significant weight must be attached
insofar as Persona is concerned for it would reasonably
have conveyed to Persona that the Minister was not then

contemplating the dismissal of the proceedings for delay.


Persona acted on that understanding to its detriment by
incurring the costs of preparing and serving the statement
of claim. It seems to me that that situation also needs to
be taken into account in assessing the next factor on
which Persona places reliance.
5.26 The second factor relied on by Persona is a
conversation deposed to in the affidavits filed which is
said to have occurred, at the tribunal, between a member
of the solicitors firm representing Persona and a solicitor in
the Chief State Solicitor's Office who was involved in
representing State interests at the Moriarty Tribunal. It
does not appear that there is any evidence denying that
such a conversation took place. On that basis it seems
that the court must, on the evidence, conclude that there
was a conversation in which it was intimated on behalf of
Persona that the Persona proceedings would not be
progressing pending developments at the tribunal and
that no objection to that course of action was intimated on
behalf of the Minister either then or subsequently.
5.27 It seems to me that too great a weight cannot be
attached to what was a relatively informal conversation
which occurred while both solicitors happened to be
present at the tribunal. In order to properly comply with
the obligation to keep all other parties informed of any
proposed unorthodox conduct of proceedings (on the basis
of the analysis which I have earlier conducted) it seems to
me that something more formal than that casual
conversation was required. Nonetheless, it seems to me
that the fact of that conversation can be taken into
account in the overall assessment of excusability. In
addition, it seems to me that it would have been
reasonable for Persona, on receiving the relevant
correspondence extending time for filing a statement of
claim by 21 days, to have assumed that the Minister had
broadly accepted inaction up to that point in time, but
then wished the proceedings to progress.
5.28 Finally, attention was drawn to the fact that, when a
senior official of Persona was giving evidence before the

tribunal, counsel for the Minister put it to him that the


tribunal was being used as a "stalking horse" for the
proceedings; thus indicating, indirectly at least, an implicit
knowledge of the plaintiffs intended course on the part of
the Minister.
5.29 Taking all three factors together it seems to me that
the Minister must, at least in a general way, have been
aware of the fact that the respective plaintiffs (certainly in
the case of Persona and, by implication, it would follow
that of Comcast also) were awaiting developments at the
Moriarty Tribunal before progressing their claim.
5.30 It is next necessary to turn to the point made on
behalf of the Minister to the effect that, whatever might
have been the situation when the proceedings were
issued, at least from the time when the opening statement
on the GSM licence module was made by counsel for the
tribunal, both plaintiffs had sufficient information available
to formulate a statement of claim. It is again important not
to view matters with the benefit of hindsight. However, it
does need to be noted that it is in the nature of tribunals,
conducted as they are in an inquisitorial manner, that
developments are likely to occur as the hearings progress.
Developments of some materiality to the issues which
arise in both of these proceedings did in fact occur. While
it is unnecessary to set it out in detail, certain payments
alleged to have been routed to Mr. Lowry by Mr. O'Brien
through the English football club Doncaster Rovers were
the subject of developments at the tribunal which, in fact,
post-dated the time when the statements of claim in these
proceedings were filed. In that context it is said that there
may well be applications to amend the proceedings to
include further allegations based on what were said to be
the revelations made in that regard at the Moriarty
Tribunal. I express no view on whether such an
amendment could or should be allowed.
5.31 However, that fact does show that it was not
unrealistic to anticipate that there might be developments
as the proceedings at the tribunal continued. In fairness to
Persona and Comcast it does also need to be noted that it

was anticipated at the time when the module concerning


the GSM licence commenced that the tribunal would
complete the hearing of evidence on that module in a
relatively short period of time. As we all know that turned
out not to be the case. However, a decision to await
developments needs to be seen in the context both of the
likelihood that such developments might well occur and
the fact that it was anticipated that all relevant
information would be available in a relatively short period
of time. In that context I agree with the views of Hardiman
J. that there could be no basis for awaiting the result of the
tribunal itself. The views expressed by a tribunal may be of
considerable public importance. However, those views
could have no bearing on civil proceedings. It follows that,
while the parties might, undoubtedly, be very interested
to hear the conclusions of the tribunal, those conclusions
could have no effect on civil proceedings and therefore
awaiting the result of the tribunal's findings could not
provide any justification for delaying the progress of civil
proceedings. What is, at least in general terms, potentially
justified, is waiting to see what information may become
available through the exercise by the tribunal of its powers
of compellability. Any such waiting would necessarily only
justify delay up to the conclusion of the evidence hearing
process for, after that time, there could be no reasonable
expectation of any further material developments which
could have a bearing on the proceedings.
5.32 While it might be said that Persona and Comcast did,
when counsel for the tribunal's opening statement had
been completed, have a significant factual basis which
ought to have allowed a statement of claim to be
formulated in both cases, there does seem to me to be
some merit in the point made in response by counsel for
both plaintiffs. It was said that it was reasonable to
anticipate, given the fluid nature of tribunals, that there
would be developments. For the reasons already set out, I
am satisfied that that is a reasonable position to take.
However, counsel went further and suggested that if, as
the Minister argued, a statement of claim should have
been filed soon after the opening statement, there was a
very real likelihood that that statement of claim would

need to have been reassessed from time to time in the


light of developments at the tribunal (leading, in all
likelihood, to a number of amendments to the statements
of claim) and that, in those circumstances, it was
reasonable to await developments during the module
concerned with the GSM licence so as to be able to
formulate the claim in as comprehensive a fashion as
possible. In that context both counsel responded to the
point made on behalf of the State, to the effect that the
statements of claim may still need to be amended, by
drawing attention to the fact that both plaintiffs were
placed in a position where they had to file the best
statement of claim that they could or else face their
respective proceedings being dismissed. All in all I am
satisfied that it was not unreasonable for Persona and
Comcast to seek to await as many developments of the
Moriarty Tribunal, relative to their proceedings, as they
could before filing a statement of claim. However, it seems
to me that the point made against both Persona and
Comcast, which accuses both of having taken unilateral
action in that regard without putting the Minister on
notice, applies equally to the excuse tendered for failing to
file a statement of claim after the opening statement as it
does to the general excuse tendered for delay.
5.33 Taking all of those factors together, the matter which
causes me most concern is the fact that neither Persona
nor Comcast took any formal steps to inform the Minister
that it was their intention to, in effect, "park" the
proceedings pending developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal. By not adopting that formal position, it seems to
me that the Minister was, at least to some extent,
prejudiced by being deprived of the opportunity of taking
advice on, and taking whatever steps might be advised in
relation to, the situation which would then have become
clear. For that reason it does not seem to me that it can
properly be said that the delay in these cases is fully
excusable.
5.34 However, in assessing the extent to which delay
might nonetheless be blameworthy it seems to me that
the court must take into account the fact that, in the

context of an allegation of covert wrongdoing where a


public tribunal with significant powers of compellability
was conducting a highly relevant investigation, it was, at
least in general terms, reasonable to await developments.
It is the failure to make sufficiently clear that that course
of action was being adopted that leads me to conclude
that the delay is not fully excusable. For the reasons
already analysed I am not satisfied that pre-statement of
claim discovery could reasonably have been seen by
either plaintiff as being likely to provide the information
necessary to produce a statement of claim on the facts of
this case. In addition, while some reasonable detail must
have been available to both plaintiffs as soon as counsel's
opening statement at the tribunal had been made, it was
not, again at the level of principle, unreasonable to wait
for what then seemed likely to be a relatively short period
of time, to ascertain whether further information might
come out. The only real criticism that can be made of both
plaintiffs in that context was that it would, perhaps, have
been more prudent, as it became clear that the relevant
module was going to take a lot longer than was first
anticipated, to again adopt the formal position that the
statement of claim was to await further potential
developments at the tribunal, thus enabling the Minister to
take whatever action it might consider appropriate in the
light of that position being adopted. Finally, for the
reasons already analysed, I am satisfied that the Minister
must have been, at least in general terms, aware, despite
the fact that neither Persona nor Comcast had formally
notified it of the fact, that the proceedings were being
parked pending the developments of the Moriarty Tribunal.
5.35 In all those circumstances it seems to me that it is
appropriate to characterise this case as one where the
explanations given by both plaintiffs go some significant
way towards providing an excuse but do not render the
delay fully excusable in all the circumstances. In that
context it is, therefore, necessary to turn to the balance of
justice.
6
The Balance of Justice
6.1 On the facts of this case it seems to me that the
starting point for consideration of where the balance of

justice lies must be to give all proper recognition to the


fact that the delay in question, while inordinate, was, for
the reasons already analysed, in my view, significantly,
although not completely, excusable. In addition to that
factor, the issues which are raised in these proceedings
involve questions of high public interest. While that fact is
not, of itself, decisive, it does seem to me that some
significant weight needs to be attached to it. A definitive
ruling by a court of competent jurisdiction on the serious
questions of fact which lie at the heart of the allegations in
both of these cases is a matter to which appropriate
weight should be attached.
6.2 In all cases where the court has to consider the
balance of justice the extent of any prejudice to the
defendant caused by delay needs to be assessed. In that
context it is important to note that the Minister did not put
forward any claim to specific prejudice in the form of
absent witnesses or missing documentation. The Minister
sought solely to rely on the undoubted general prejudice
that may arise when any proceedings are conducted a
very long time after the events under scrutiny. It was in
that context that Gilligan J. characterised the State's
prejudice as moderate.
6.3 While one should not become overly enmeshed in
terminology on degree such as "mild", "moderate",
"severe" or "extreme", I would, respectfully, disagree with
Gilligan J. and would instead characterise the prejudice
established on behalf of the Minister in this case as being
mild. A number of factors need to be taken into account.
At least so far as many of the issues which are likely to
arise in these proceedings at trial are concerned, this case
can be regarded as a so-called "documents" case, where
there are contemporary records of much of the matters
which will require to be addressed in evidence. It is, of
course, the case that this is not a pure "documents" case
where the issues turn on the construction of documents
and where oral testimony is likely to be of only marginal
relevance. In such cases prejudice caused by delay will be
non-existent or extremely remote. However, the
availability of contemporary records will, in my view, at

least so far as a lot of the issues likely to arise are


concerned, minimise any risk of prejudice.
6.4 There are, it has to be said, some issues which are
likely to arise (if one takes into account the matters which
influenced the views of the Moriarty Tribunal and which
are, subject to appropriate evidence being capable of
being led, likely to figure at the trial of these respective
proceedings) which are not reflected in contemporary
documents. In that context counsel for the Minister drew
attention to a passage from my judgment in Stephens v.
Flynn Limited where, at p.13, I said the following:"He has not, however, been able to point to any specific
witness who is no longer available. It must also be taken
into account that there are, apparently, statements of the
relevant witnesses to the events of the 5th December,
1995 taken by the Garda on the occasion in question.
That being said an issue as to the credibility of witnesses
(which will almost certainly arise) will be all the more
difficult of resolution where those witnesses are being
asked to recollect matters that occurred so long ago. While
the prejudice may not be quite as great as the Defendant
contends for I am satisfied that it will nonetheless be of
some significance."
6.5 Based on that passage, it is said that, while the fact
that almost all of the witnesses likely to be called in these
proceedings will have made statements to the Moriarty
Tribunal in which they will have recorded their accounts is
a matter to which some weight can be given, it does not
displace the prejudice that may arise when the court is
called upon to assess the credibility of those witnesses.
The reasoning behind that passage from Stephens v. Flynn
Limited is that experience tells that a court, when faced
with having to choose between the accounts of two or
more witnesses and in the absence of contemporary
objective or forensic evidence which may give a clear
indication as to which account should be preferred, will
often have to base an assessment of the evidence on the
court's impression of both the truthfulness and accuracy of
the recollection of the witnesses concerned. In at least
some cases the choice may be difficult. In that context

little things can matter. Against that background, while the


fact that parties may, a long time ago, have made a
witness statement, which may provide some, but not too
great, assistance for the court in forming its impression of
the truthfulness of witnesses; ultimately the courts
assessment may turn on their ability to describe aspects
of the events not recorded in their witness statements.
6.6 However, the circumstances of this case are almost
unique. Not only have all (or almost all) likely witnesses
given careful written statements to the Moriarty Tribunal,
those witnesses have been the subject of exhaustive cross
examination on behalf of many interested parties and,
indeed, on examination by the tribunal itself. Thus any
likely points of detail on which the credibility of witnesses
might turn, even if not included in the relevant witnesses'
written statements to the tribunal, are likely to have
already been explored in oral testimony. That is not to say
that some further nuanced questions might not arise at a
trial of these proceedings. However, because the relevant
evidence has not only been recorded in writing but also
tested by cross-examination, it seems to me that the
likelihood of prejudice is significantly reduced.
6.7 Having regard, therefore, to the significant, although
not complete, excusability of the delay, to the significant
public interest in having these matters of high public
controversy determined in a court of law, and to the mild
level of any prejudice, I am satisfied that the balance of
justice in this case falls in favour of allowing the
proceedings to continue. I have come to that view despite
applying a stricter approach to excusability and the
balance of justice which, for the reasons already analysed,
I am satisfied is appropriate. However, it bears repeating
that the facts of this case are truly unique.
6.8 Having reached those conclusions it is necessary to
turn briefly to the second leg of the case made on behalf
of the Minister which was to the effect that the
proceedings should be dismissed, even in the absence of
any culpable delay, because of the real risk of an unfair
trial.
7
Risk of an Unfair Trial

7.1 Irrespective of whatever threshold might be


appropriate (and for the reasons already analysed it may
be that a somewhat higher threshold than that identified
in the existing jurisprudence might need to be considered
in an appropriate case) I am satisfied that the Minister has
failed to establish a sufficient risk of an unfair trial.
7.2 For the reasons already analysed I am satisfied that it
is appropriate to characterise the likely prejudice or
impairment to the Minister in the conduct of its defence as
being mild. While it is true that it is likely that the trial of
these proceedings will take place the best part of 20 years
after most of the events which will be under scrutiny,
nonetheless there are a whole series of unique factors
which render the conduct of such a trial nonetheless
unlikely to be unfair. For those reasons, it seems to me,
the second leg of the State's application must also fail.
8
Conclusions
8.1 For the reasons set out, I am, therefore, satisfied that
there was inordinate delay which, although significantly
excused, was not fully excusable. On that basis it is
necessary to consider the balance of justice. For the
reasons set out I am satisfied that that balance favours
the continuance of these proceedings.
8.2 Likewise I am satisfied that the Minister has failed to
establish the sort of impairment to his ability to conduct a
defence of these proceedings, or, indeed, any other delayinduced unfairness, such as would warrant the dismissal of
the proceedings even if there were no culpable delay.
8.3 It is for those reasons that I support the ruling
already given to allow the appeals in both cases and
substitute an order dismissing the Minister's application on
each of the notices of motion before the court.

THE SUPREME COURT

[Appeal No: 213/2007]


Denham C.J.
Hardiman J.
Fennelly J.
McKechnie J.
Clarke J.
Between/
Persona Digital Telephony Limited and Sigma Wireless
Networks Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
The Minister for Public Enterprise, Ireland and the Attorney
General
Defendants/Respondents
THE SUPREME COURT
[Appeals Nos: 215/2007 and 216/2007]

Between/
Comcast International Incorporated, Declan Ganley,
Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
The Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis O'Brien, Ireland and
the Attorney General
Defendants/Respondents
Judgment of Mr. Justice Clarke delivered the 17th of
October, 2012.
1
Introduction
1.1 The events surrounding the award of a GSM mobile
telephone licence by the Minister for Public Enterprise in

1995 have been a matter of very significant public


controversy for well over a decade now. Those events
have been the subject of investigation by, and the report
of, what is commonly referred to as the Moriarty Tribunal.
As is widely known Esat Telecommunications Limited
("Esat"), the third named defendant in the proceedings
brought by Comcast International Incorporated along with
three other parties (collectively "Comcast", and the
"Comcast proceedings" respectively), was successful in
the competition which led to the grant of the licence in
question. Comcast was one of its losing competitors.
Likewise the first named plaintiff in the other proceedings
which are the subject of these appeals, Persona Digital
Telephony Limited, who is joined by a co-plaintiff in its
action (collectively "Persona" and the "Persona
proceedings" respectively), was another unsuccessful
competitor. Comcast, Persona and the other plaintiffs have
initiated these proceedings with a view, amongst other
things, to seeking damages arising out of what was said to
have been misfeasance of public office, deceit and fraud in
the way in which that competition was conducted.
1.2 It can, I think, be said that if the allegations which are
made in these proceedings, and which formed the subject
of the findings of the Moriarty Tribunal, were to be
established in a court of competent jurisdiction, they
would amount to amongst the most serious factual
determinations made by a court in this jurisdiction since
the foundation of the State. The allegations involve the
assertion that the second named defendant in the
Comcast proceedings ("Mr. Lowry"), who held the office of
Minister for Public Enterprise at the time of the
competition, was paid money by the fourth named
defendant in the Comcast proceedings ("Mr. O'Brien") in
order to influence the competition. It is alleged that such
monies were paid both directly and indirectly and that Mr.
Lowry, as Minister, did, in return for those monies, actually
influence the competition in order to procure that Esat
should win.
1.3 However, this court is not now concerned with the
substance of those allegations. In circumstances to which

it will be necessary to refer in due course, the first named


defendant in both proceedings (the Minister) applied to
the High Court to dismiss both the Comcast and the
Persona proceedings for want of prosecution, delay and on
the basis of the court's inherent jurisdiction to dismiss
proceedings when there is a serious risk that any trial
would be unfair. Those applications came on for hearing
before Gilligan J. who made the order sought on behalf of
the Minister in both proceedings. It should be noted that
the non-State parties in the Comcast proceedings,
namely Mr. Lowry, Esat and Mr. OBrien, did not participate
in the Ministers application. Comcast, Persona and their
associated plaintiffs separately appealed to this court
against the judgment and order of Gilligan J.. This court
has already ruled that the appeals be allowed and that the
order dismissing both proceedings be reversed. I support
the decision of this court in that regard. However, it was
indicated that reasons would be given at a later date. This
judgment is directed to the issues which arise on those
appeals and to my reasons for supporting the ruling of this
court. The backdrop to these appeals is the sequence of
events giving rise to both proceedings and the progress of
those proceedings once commenced. As much of the
relevant factual background is dealt with in other
judgments I will turn only briefly to the history of relevant
events.
2
The History of Events
2.1 There are detailed accounts of the facts to be found
in the judgments of Denham C.J., Hardiman J. and
McKechnie J. Those judgments set out a full account of the
proceedings and their, admittedly limited, procedural
history. Background facts are also set out. In addition there
is an analysis of the progress of the Moriarty Tribunal
insofar as it dealt with the issues concerning the award of
the GSM licence. In those circumstances it is unnecessary
to repeat those accounts in this judgment.
2.2 However, there are a few additional facts which are,
in my view, of some limited relevance to the issues which
require to be determined in these appeals. Those facts will
be dealt with as they arise in the context of a discussion of
the issues debated on this appeal.

2.3 Against that background it is necessary to turn to the


test by reference to which the court ought to consider
whether to dismiss civil proceedings on the basis of delay,
on the one hand, or in furtherance of its inherent
jurisdiction to ensure a fair trial, on the other hand; it
being recalled that the Minister sought the dismissal of
both of these proceedings on both of those grounds and
that Gilligan J. acceded to the Minister's application in both
cases on both grounds. I turn first to the test applicable
where it is sought to dismiss proceedings for delay.
3.
Dismissal For Delay The Test
3.1 In one sense it can be said that the overall approach
is well settled. In Desmond v M.G.N. Limited [2009] 1 I.R.
737, at p.749, Macken J. (who was part of the majority of
this court in that case) adopted the tests which I had
mentioned in Stephens v. Flynn Limited [2005] IEHC 148
being:"1. ascertain whether the delay in question is inordinate
and inexcusable; and
2.
if it is so established the court must decide where the
balance of justice lies."
3.2 In formulating the test in that way I had followed a
long line of authority stretching back to the decisions of
this court in Rainsford v. Limerick Corporation [1995] 2
I.L.R.M. 561 and Primor plc v. Stokes Kennedy Crowley
[1996] 2 I.R. 459. I did not understand counsel on either
side of these appeals to suggest that those tests were not
the applicable tests. In addition I do not understand any of
the recent jurisprudence in this area to question that those
tests represent the appropriate questions to be considered
by the court.
3.3. However, it does have to be accepted that there has
been what might, at a minimum, be considered to have
been a difference of emphasis apparent from certain
recent judgments in both this court and in the High Court,
as to the manner in which those tests should be applied
and in particular whether there was to be, as I put it in
Stephens v. Flynn Limited, a re-calibration or as others
have described it, a tightening up, in the application of

those tests.
3.4 That recent jurisprudence goes back to the judgment
of Hardiman J. in this court in Gilroy v. Flynn [2005] 1
I.L.R.M. 290. That judgment suggested that the courts had
become ever more conscious of the unfairness of, and
increased possibility of injustice which attached to,
allowing an action which depends on witness testimony to
proceed a considerable time after the cause of action had
accrued. The judgment also noted the decisions of the
European Court of Human Rights ("the ECtHR"), in cases
such as McMullen v. Ireland (Application no. 42297/98,
29th July, 2004) [2004] ECHR 42297/98, and the
obligation, independent of the actions of the parties, on
the courts to ensure that civil litigation is determined
within a reasonable time. Hardiman J. also noted then
recent changes in the Rules of the Superior Courts which
appear to place a greater obligation on the courts not to
excuse, save in special circumstances, repeated
procedural failures on the part of litigants.
3.5 Relying on those matters I expressed the view in
Stephens v. Flynn, in a passage immediately after that
setting out the tests approved of by Macken J. in
Desmond, that:"[I]t seems to me that for the reasons set out by the
Supreme Court in Gilroy the calibration of the weight to be
attached to various factors in the assessment of the
balance of justice and, indeed, the length of time which
might be considered to give rise to an inordinate delay or
the matters which might go to excuse such delay are
issues which may need to be significantly re-assessed and
adjusted in the light of the conditions now prevailing.
Delay which would have been tolerated may now be
regarded as inordinate. Excuses which sufficed may no
longer be accepted. The balance of justice may be tilted in
favour of imposing greater obligation of expedition and
against requiring the same level of prejudice as
heretofore."
3.6 That reasoning was upheld by this court in an appeal
in Stephens v. Paul Flynn Limited [2008] 4 I.R. 31.

3.7 However, the need for recalibration or tightening up


was questioned to some extent in Desmond where
Geoghegan J. (also part of the majority) indicated that he
was not convinced that it was necessary to revisit the
principles set out in Primor and Rainsford.
3.8 In the light of the, at least potentially, conflicting
jurisprudence on the question of whether there ought
properly be a re-calibration or tightening up of the criteria
by reference to which the actions or inactions of parties
might be judged, I suggested an overall approach in
Rodenhuis and Verloop B.V. v. HDS Energy Ltd. [2011] 1
I.R. 611, at pp.616-617, in these terms:"As long as it remains the case that the procedure in this
jurisdiction is left largely in the hands of the parties, then
it follows that the pace at which litigation will progress will
be highly dependent on the initiative shown by those
parties. To the extent that it becomes clear that parties
will be significantly indulged even though they engage in
delay, then that fact is only likely to encourage delay. If
parties feel they can get away with it, and if that feeling is
justified by the response of the courts, then there is likely
to be more delay. It seems to me, therefore, that it is
necessary, in a system where the initiative is left largely
up to the parties to progress proceedings, for the courts to
make clear that there will not be an excessive indulgence
of delay, because if the courts do not make that clear, it
follows that the courts actions will encourage delay and,
thus, will encourage a situation where cases will not be
completed within the sort of times which would be
consistent with compliance with Irelands obligations
under the European Convention on Human Rights.
As I pointed out it is correct to say that there is no
jurisprudence of the [ECtHR] dealing with the
circumstances in which proceedings must be dismissed for
delay. However, it does seem to me that if the courts in a
common law jurisdiction, and in the absence of case
management for any particular category of case, to use
the words of Hardiman J., endlessly indulge delay then
that fact is only likely to increase delay and increase a
failure to comply with Irelands Convention obligations. It

seems to me that that analysis justifies the view which I


expressed in [Stephens] (and which was approved of by
the division of the Supreme Court which heard the appeal
in that case) which was to the effect that there needed to
be a tightening up or recalibration of the application of the
long established principles in the delay jurisprudence,
without altering the tests to be applied.
For those reasons it seems to me that the tightening up to
which I referred in Stephens is an appropriate course of
action for the courts to adopt. It does not seem to me that
there is any clear or authoritative view from the Supreme
Court which would bind me to take a different view. I
therefore propose to apply the test which I identified in
[Stephens] and which was approved of by Macken J.,
speaking for the majority in [Desmond], but with the
tightening up to which I referred in the very next
paragraph of my judgment in [Stephens]."
3.9 I see no reason to depart from the views which I
expressed in Roddenhuis. The overall test remains the
same. That has been the consistent position adopted in all
the cases. However, it seems to me that the factors first
identified by Hardiman J. in Gilroy do require that the
application of that test be approached on a significantly
less indulgent basis than heretofore.
3.10 However, I should express my agreement with a
number of the observations made on this question by
McKechnie J. in his judgment in this case. First, I agree
fully with the comments made by reference to Guerin v.
Guerin [1993] I.L.R.M. 243. The circumstances of the
parties and, in particular, any disparity in the resources
available to the parties must always be a factor which the
court takes into account. The degree of expedition and
compliance with time limits which could properly be
expected of large corporations involved in commercial
disputes cannot reasonably be required of poorly
resourced or otherwise disadvantaged litigants who may
have to resort for representation to small law firms
frequently accepting instructions without any guarantee of
payment. Any legitimate tightening up must give all due
consideration to the difficulties with which such parties are

faced in progressing litigation which can, in many cases,


be of significant importance to the party concerned.
3.11 Second, I agree with the views expressed by
McKechnie J. as to the need to apply any heightened
standards of expedition to defendants as well. If the true
rationale for a tightening up is the need for a more timeconscious regime to ensure that proceedings are
determined in a timely fashion, then it follows that the
need for such a regime places obligations on defendants
as well. The problem with which courts in a common law
system is faced is that, in the absence of active judicial
case management, the pace at which litigation is to
progress is left largely in the hands of the parties. While
active case management has been introduced in certain
categories of cases in recent times, it may not be
practicable to provide such case management in all cases.
Indeed a high level of (costly) management may not be
suitable for all types of cases and in all circumstances.
There will, therefore, remain cases where the pace of
litigation does lie, to a significant extent, in the hands of
the parties. But, as McKechnie J. points out, that fact
places obligations on defendants as well. The Rules of
Court provide various mechanisms which allow a
defendant, who is concerned by the slow pace of litigation,
to seek to have the process accelerated. A defendant who
does not avail of those procedures is, in my view, in a
different position from a defendant who has sought to
speed up the process but has been frustrated in that
endeavour by a failure on the part of the relevant plaintiff
to respond reasonably.
3.12 Finally, I would also agree with McKechnie J. that,
while a gold standard of practice must always be striven
for, it would be unjust to regard a party who, in all the
circumstances, had acted with reasonable expedition, as
having been guilty of inordinate delay simply because the
standards of expedition demonstrated do not measure up
to the very highest standards of best practice.
3.13 With those observations in mind I do, however,
remain of the view that tightening up is required. While

the court will, understandably, be concerned to balance


the interests of justice arising in the case before it and, in
that regard, to consider all relevant facts, nonetheless the
overall approach of the courts, if unduly lax, has the
potential to create injustice by delay across a whole range
of cases whose facts may never come to be considered by
a judge, but whose progress is adversely affected by a
culture of delay.
3.14 It is next necessary to turn to the test by reference to
which proceedings may be dismissed, even in the absence
of fault, as a result of the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
4.
Unfairness The Test
4.1 That there is a separate line of authority suggesting
that there are circumstances in which proceedings can be
dismissed for delay, even though there is no culpability on
the part of the plaintiff concerned, cannot doubted. Those
authorities were analysed by Gilligan J. in his judgment in
this case between pp.40 and 45. Towards the end of p.45
Gilligan J. concluded, correctly in my view, that, whilst in
some of the cases there was something of a conflation
between arguments relying on prejudice caused by
inordinate and inexcusable delay, on the one hand, and
simple unfairness, on the other hand, there remains a
separate jurisdiction in the court to dismiss if there is a
real prospect that the defendant will not be able to have a
fair trial or that it would be unfair to require the defendant
to meet the case after such a long delay.
4.2 For the reasons which I addressed in my judgment in
Kennedy v. D.P.P. [2012] IESC 34 (although that case was
concerned with prohibition in the criminal context), I am
concerned to ensure that proceedings should be tried on
the merits in all cases where no blame can lie on the party
bringing the proceedings (plaintiff or prosecutor) save
where there is a high degree of assurance that the
relevant defendant will not be able to get a fair trial or will
suffer serious unfairness. Nevertheless, for reasons which
will become apparent, it does not seem to me that the
facts of this case demonstrate the sort of prejudice or
impairment to the Minister in the conduct of his defence
which would meet the test in any of the ways in which it

has been characterised in the jurisprudence. This case is


not, therefore and as should become clear in the course of
this judgment, one in which it is necessary to address with
some precision the precise test which is to be applied in
dismissing a case where there is no blameworthy delay on
the part of the plaintiff.
4.3 However, I should make one general observation. It
seems to me that the threshold which must be
surmounted to justify the dismissal of proceedings where
there is no culpable delay on the part of the plaintiff must
necessarily be more onerous than that which applies in
the case of culpable delay. If the thresholds were the same
then the jurisprudence on delay in such cases would be
meaningless for the level of impairment in the ability to
present a defence which would have to be shown would be
the same whether there was or was not culpable delay.
Furthermore, a test which made it easier to dismiss
proceedings where there was no culpable delay would be
illogical. It follows, in my view, that whatever approach is
adopted to the dismissal of cases where no culpable delay
is established, it must, necessarily, require that a higher
threshold be met. The rationale behind the existence of
two separate bases for dismissal is that there will be some
cases where the degree of unfairness to a defendant
(whether because of severe impairment in the ability to
mount a defence or other factors) may be so great the
even a blameless plaintiff may have to suffer their
proceedings being dismissed.
4.4 Having dealt with the relevant tests I now turn to a
consideration of whether the Minister is entitled to have
both of these proceedings dismissed for inordinate and
inexcusable delay in accordance with the jurisprudence to
which I have referred.
5.
Delay
5.1 As pointed out earlier, the first leg of the relevant
test is as to whether a plaintiff can be said to have been
guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay. There was no
question but that Persona, Comcast and the other
plaintiffs (collectively "Persona and Comcast") were guilty
of inordinate delay. Neither plaintiff contested that

allegation. It is, indeed, impossible to see how any contest


could have been raised. The delay between the issuing of
the relevant proceedings and the filing of the statements
of claim was of the order of five years. Delays of much
shorter periods have been found to represent inordinate
delay. Even in complicated cases, where the formulation of
a detailed statement of claim would undoubtedly take
some time, delays of a fraction of five years have been
considered inordinate.
5.2 In addition it is clear from cases such as Birkett v.
James [1977] 2 All E.R. 801 (as adopted in both the High
Court and this court in Stephens v. Paul Flynn Limited) that
a party who starts their proceedings late, while within the
relevant period provided for in the Statute of Limitations,
bears an added burden of progressing their proceedings
with expedition. The point is that the period within which
proceedings have to be commenced is laid down by
statute. It is not for the courts to second guess the choice
of period provided for by the Oireachtas. However, the
courts role in ensuring a fair and just resolution of
proceedings requires that all reasonable steps are taken to
ensure that the gap between the events which are the
subject of a trial and the trial itself is no longer than might
be considered reasonable in the context of the limitation
period provided for by the Oireachtas for that type of
claim. Therefore, where a claim is started promptly, some
greater degree of latitude may be allowed as to its pace of
progress (everything else being equal) compared with a
claim which is brought just as the limitation period is
about to run out so that the period from cause of action to
trial is going to be lengthy in any event. As noted in the
judgment of Hardiman J., these proceedings were
commenced at the very extremity of the limitation period
and would, therefore, have been required to have been
progressed with extra expedition. The fact that the
respective proceedings were served at the limit of the
period allowed by the rules for service and thus well
outside the limitation period only adds to that
requirement. Inordinate delay is, therefore, clear.
5.3 Whether the first leg of the test is met, therefore,

turns on whether the undoubtedly inordinate delay which


occurred can also be said to be inexcusable. Both Persona
and Comcast rely on substantially the same and single
excuse. It is said that it was necessary to await
developments at the Moriarty Tribunal in order that the
respective claims could be properly formulated and
pleaded at all. In those circumstances it is said that, in the
very unusual situation which arose in this case, an
undoubtedly inordinate delay is excusable.
5.4 The first leg of the test, therefore, turns on whether
that explanation provides an adequate excuse for the
delay in question.
5.5 Before going on to deal with that issue it seems to
me to be appropriate to make a number of observations.
First, there is the question of covert wrongdoing. In many
cases a plaintiff wishing to pursue civil proceedings will,
either of that party's own knowledge, or with the
assistance of known witnesses of fact or experts whom
that party can employ, have sufficient information
available to it to be able to plead their case. Persons
injured in accidents, whether on the roads or in the
workplace, will normally be able to give a reasonable
account of how the accident occurred such that their
lawyers can formulate a claim on their behalf in
negligence if that be stateable. Likewise, experts such as
engineers or doctors can be employed to provide
necessary detail if required. Similarly, parties aggrieved, in
the commercial context, with those with whom they have
contractual relations will normally, from their own
knowledge, be able to specify the terms of any relevant
contract and, at least generally, be able to set out any
alleged breaches and their consequences. It may, of
course, be the case that such parties will require the aid of
procedural measures such as discovery or interrogatories
in order to be able to present their case to its best
advantage at trial. Evidence or lines of inquiry may be
suggested which may lead to a stronger case. However, it
would be rare in such cases that the party would not be
able to formulate their claim in any meaningful way.

5.6 However, different considerations may well arise


(although not necessarily in all cases) where an allegation
is made of covert wrongdoing. The problem with covert
wrongdoing is, of course, that it is covert. A person who
suffers from covert wrongdoing may have little or no direct
knowledge of the wrongdoing. In some, perhaps many,
cases a party may entertain a suspicion of, for example,
fraudulent or anti-competitive behaviour which is said to
have operated to their detriment. However, a suspicion
that could lead to no more than a vague generalised
allegation could not provide a proper basis for
commencing proceedings. As was noted in discussion
between the court and counsel during the appeals in this
case, it will often be as a result of some event over which
an aggrieved party had no control or influence that
information may become available such as would allow
such a party to turn a mere suspicion of covert
wrongdoing into a stateable allegation. Inquiries by public
authorities (including prosecution authorities) may
sometimes provide the necessary detail. Whistleblowers
may bring information into the public domain. A party may
chance upon some useful material capable of turning a
suspicion into an allegation. The important point to
emphasise is that persons who wish to make an allegation
of covert wrongdoing will inevitably face difficulties in
being able to formulate a claim. It seems to me that all
due allowance needs to be made for that fact in assessing
cases where delay is alleged in claims of covert
wrongdoing.
5.7 That being said, the difficulties which such parties
may encounter cannot be allowed to be an excuse for
procedural inaction. It is equally the case that persons
facing the kind of serious allegations which are frequently
at the heart of covert wrongdoing claims are just as
entitled as any other party facing a serious allegation to
have the allegation concerned heard and determined in a
timely manner. A party bringing a claim for covert
wrongdoing cannot just sit on its hands and hope that
something will turn up. Such a party is obliged to take all
reasonable steps to progress their claim. However, the
speed at which the claim progresses must be judged,

provided that all reasonable steps are taken, against the


backdrop that it may, nonetheless, be difficult to progress
such a claim in as expeditious a way as the type of claim
where most of the information necessary for the
formulation of the claim in question will be available to the
claimant.
5.8 Second, it seems to me that a party, who wishes to
adopt what might, in ordinary circumstances, be
considered to be an unorthodox approach to litigation
(such as by putting the proceedings on hold pending some
event), is required to, at a minimum, place on record with
all other parties to the litigation, that that course of action
is being adopted. It does not seem to me that it is
legitimate for a party to adopt an unorthodox approach to
litigation on a unilateral basis. Indeed, it was the failure of
the plaintiff in Desmond v. M.G.N. to inform the defendant
that it was intended to await developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal that led this court to view the explanation given
as not being sufficient to excuse the delay in question.
While Desmond v. M.G.N. and this case involved a party
who was in the unusual circumstances of electing to await
developments at a public tribunal of inquiry, it seems to
me that the overall principle is more far-reaching. A party
who is likely to have to spend a much longer period than
might ordinarily and reasonably be expected in preparing
court documents or in preparing to take an important step
in proceedings (such as serving a notice of trial or
certifying the case as being ready) because of delays
being encountered in, for example, procuring expert
reports, has, in my view, an obligation to bring those
difficulties to the attention of all other parties.
5.9 In different contexts it has often been said that
litigation is a two-way process. However, it seems to me
that all parties are entitled contemporaneously to
reasonable disclosure of an intention to adopt an
unorthodox approach which is likely to lead to a delay of a
significant variety in the progress of litigation. It seems to
me that much greater weight ought legitimately be placed
on explanations which are tendered contemporaneously
thus affording other parties a reasonable opportunity to

take whatever steps may be considered appropriate in the


event that it is considered that the proposed unorthodox
course of action is not justifiable. Unorthodox action
signalled contemporaneously and not contested at the
time is likely to be more readily accepted by the court as
providing an excuse than the same action taken
unilaterally and only referred to after the event as
retrospectively providing an explanation.
5.10 Against that backdrop it is necessary to turn to the
facts of these cases. In that context there is a slight
difference between the respective plaintiffs. I will deal with
that difference in due course. However, as pointed out, the
broad excuse tendered is the same. It is accepted that the
proceedings were only issued at the last minute so as to
ensure that the Statute of Limitations did not run. Both
plaintiffs seemed to suggest that suspicions about the
integrity of the licence awarding process were held from
the beginning. However, it does not seem on the evidence
currently before the court that those suspicions could have
matured into anything more than a mere suspicion until
certain matters came into the public domain in the period
immediately prior to the expiry of the limitation period.
One such matter was a newspaper report which suggested
that a company which formed part of the winning
consortium had made a significant party political donation
at or around the time when the licence process was afoot.
The second, and it would appear connected, development
was the announcement by the Moriarty Tribunal that it
intended to inquire into the award of the GSM licence. On
the evidence currently available it does not seem to me to
be unfair to characterise those events as being ones which
could reasonably cause a mere suspicion to mature into an
at least stateable allegation.
5.11 However, at the time both proceedings commenced it
does not seem to me that either plaintiff would have had
available to it anything remotely like sufficient information
to formulate a detailed statement of claim. It is in that
context that both Persona and Comcast say that it was
legitimate for them to await developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal so as to place them in a position where they

would be able to formulate a statement of claim. At the


level of principle it seems to me that Persona and Comcast
are correct in that regard. The allegation made is of highly
covert activity. There was no reasonable basis on which
either Person or Comcast could have been expected to
have had sufficient information to formulate a statement
of claim in any meaningful way at the time their
respective proceedings were issued. There is, in my view,
a significant difference between having sufficient
information to justify issuing proceedings in circumstances
which would not amount to an abuse of process, on the
one hand, and having sufficient information to be able to
formulate a claim in a detailed way, on the other.
5.12 Against that general proposition, however, the
Minister makes a number of arguments. It is said that
there were courses of action available to both Persona and
Comcast which could, and it is said should, have been
adopted in the light of the undoubted obligation which
rested on Persona and Comcast, having regard to their
very late commencement of proceedings, to progress with
all possible expedition.
5.13 First, it is said that pre-statement of claim discovery
of documents could have been sought. While there are,
undoubtedly, circumstances in which the court has a
jurisdiction to depart from the normal procedure of
allowing discovery only when the issues between the
parties have been knit by the exchange of pleadings, I am
not convinced on the facts of this case that pre-statement
of claim discovery could have appeared to Comcast or
Persona as being likely to supply them with the necessary
information to formulate their claims. Doubtless any
documents held by the Department of Public Enterprise,
arising out of the award process, could have been sought.
However, the key information concerning the very serious
allegations of wrongdoing, which are at the heart of these
proceedings, involved a money trail. One should, of
course, avoid over-reliance on hindsight. Nevertheless, it
is clear that establishing the series of transactions which,
in the view of the Moriarty Tribunal, demonstrated monies
being paid to Mr. Lowry, involved a significant degree of

forensic disclosure from financial institutions and others


with the benefit of the significant powers of compellability
which are available to a tribunal of inquiry. Even without
the benefit of that hindsight it seems to me that it was not
unreasonable for Persona and Comcast to conclude that
discovery was unlikely to produce the necessary detail and
that it was much more likely that any such detail would, if
it existed, become available through the tribunal.
5.14 The second and third matters relied on by the
Minister are the suggestions that Persona and Comcast
could have either applied to the court to stay their own
proceedings pending developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal or, alternatively, ought at least to have indicated
to the Minister that it was their intention to "park" the
proceedings pending such developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal and thus enabling the Minister to take whatever
action might have been considered appropriate in those
circumstances.
5.15 It seems to me that both of those factors can be
considered together. It is true that there have been come
cases (such as Doe v. Armour Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. [1994] 3 I.R. 78) where the court has allowed a
plaintiff to put its own proceedings on hold (by granting a
stay). However, most of those cases involved parties who
had other proceedings in being (perhaps in another
jurisdiction) which it was suggested ought to be decided
first or where a challenge existed to the entitlement of
another jurisdiction to determine certain issues and where
the Irish proceedings were a fallback to preserve the
plaintiff's position in the event that the challenge to the
foreign court's jurisdiction was successful. None of the
cases cited in argument came close to the circumstances
which existed in these cases. However, that leads to the
third point. Whether or not Persona and Comcast could
have been proactive and sought to stay their own
proceedings, I am satisfied, for the reasons already
analysed, that it is not appropriate for a party to take the
unorthodox step of, in effect, "parking" proceedings
without at least making some attempt to raise that
question with the other parties to the relevant litigation.

Subject to one matter which arises only in the context of


the Persona proceedings, no attempt so to do was made
by either plaintiff in these proceedings. This is an issue to
which I will return.
5.16 Finally, attention is drawn by the Minister to the fact
that, long before the statements of claim in these
proceedings were filed, counsel on behalf of the Moriarty
Tribunal had, as is the normal practice, given a lengthy
opening statement at the commencement of the module
of the tribunal which was concerned with the award of the
GSM licence. On that basis it is said that, at least from that
time, there was significant information available to both
plaintiffs which would have allowed the formulation of a
statement of claim in, it is said, much the same form as
the statements of claim which were ultimately filed. It is in
that context appropriate to note that, in reality, the
statements of claim only came to be filed when motions
were brought which had the effect of compelling the
delivery of statements of claim on risk of the respective
proceedings being struck out. I will also return to this
issue.
5.17 It seems to me that there is some substance to the
State's argument under the latter two headings just
referred to.
5.18 In that context, it is, however, important to note
three countervailing factors which have some influence on
an overall assessment of those issues. First, attention was
drawn to the fact that a warning letter was sent by the
Minister to the solicitors for Persona which gave a period
of 21 days within which to file a statement of claim in
default of which an application to "strike out these
proceedings for want of prosecution" was threatened. The
statement of claim in those proceedings was, in fact, filed
within that period of 21 days.
5.19 There are two express provisions to be found in the
rules which allow for an application to dismiss for want of
prosecution. The more general provision is to be found in
O.122, r.11 which says the following:-

"[] In any cause or matter in which there has been no


proceeding for two years from the last proceeding had, the
defendant may apply to the court to dismiss the same for
want of prosecution, and on the hearing of such
application the Court may order the cause or matter to be
dismissed accordingly or may make such order and on
such terms as to the Court may seem just.[]"
5.20 A more specific provision is found in O.27 which
applies in circumstances where a statement of claim is not
filed in the time required by the rules and where, in cases
such as those with which this judgment is concerned and
involving a claim for unliquidated damages in contract or
tort, the moving party is required to write a preliminary
letter which offers an extension of time.
5.21 It may be that it is also possible to invoke the courts
inherent jurisdiction to dismiss in the case of inordinate
and inexcusable delay even in cases which are not
governed by the two specific rules to which reference has
been made. In that context it is relevant to note paras. 1573 of Delaney and McGrath Civil Procedure in the Superior
Courts (3rd Edition Thomson Round Hall 2012) and the
reference therein to the decision of this court in Collins v
Dublin Bus (Unrep., Supreme Court, Murphy J., 22nd
October, 1999).
5.22 Under the rules, therefore, a claim to dismiss for
want of prosecution arises either where the statement of
claim is not filed on time, in which case an opportunity to
file within 21 days must be given, or where there has been
no action for two years. In the latter case no offer of an
extension of time need be made. An application to dismiss
for inordinate and inexcusable delay may also arise under
the court's inherent jurisdiction in other circumstances.
5.23 It is clear, therefore, that the Minister had a number
of options available to him. It is certainly the case that the
Minister could have moved under O.122 for it is clear that
a period of much more than two years had elapsed with no
proceeding. It may also be that the Minister could also
have moved under the inherent jurisdiction. It is
interesting to note that the motion brought by the Minister

in the Persona proceedings seeks, in the alternative, an


order "pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of this
Honourable Court dismissing the within proceedings as
against the defendants for delay and/or want of
prosecution" and an order "pursuant to the inherent
jurisdiction of this Honourable Court dismissing the within
proceedings as against the defendants in the interests of
justice". No specific provision of the Rules of Court is
referred to. It is not clear, therefore, as to whether the
Minister actually considered that he was proceeding under
O.27. Certainly the fact that a warning letter of the type
that is required, by the rules, to be sent in advance of
making an application to dismiss for want of prosecution
under O.27 was written. However, be that as it may, it is
clear that the Minister had a number of options open to
him at the time when it was decided to write to Persona.
Even if the Minister considered moving under O.27 (which
would, as has been pointed out, have required the writing
of a letter extending time for 21 days) the Minister could
have chosen an alternative means of action.
5.24 It seems to me that O.27 r.1 and r.1A are primarily
designed as a method of speeding up proceedings even
though the form of the order which may ultimately be
sought, is to dismiss for want of prosecution. That
situation is analogous to that which now pertains under
O.27 r. 8 where, in the cases to which that rule applies, a
plaintiff is required to write a similar letter extending time
for defence prior to initiating a motion for judgment in
default of defence. While the ultimate order which would
be sought in the absence of the defence being filed within
the extended period granted by the letter is an order for
judgment nonetheless the primary purpose of the order is
to provide a mechanism whereby the filing of a defence
may be speeded up rather than the proceedings brought
to an end.
5.25 There can be little doubt, therefore, that by choosing
to write a letter extending time (whether because of a
desire to move under O.27 or otherwise) the Minister
would have conveyed the impression to Persona that he
was more concerned with ensuring that the proceedings

were now moved along after a period of inaction rather


than that the Minister desired to bring the proceedings to
an end. While it does not seem to me that such an action
on the part of the Minister creates a formal estoppel
preventing the Minister from thereafter moving to dismiss
(in the absence of further significant delay) and while I
would not go so far as McKechnie J. in treating the
Minister's actions as an abuse sufficient to debar the
Minister from seeking to have the Persona proceedings
dismissed, nonetheless the choice by the Minister to write
the letter extending time seems to me to be a factor to
which some very significant weight must be attached
insofar as Persona is concerned for it would reasonably
have conveyed to Persona that the Minister was not then
contemplating the dismissal of the proceedings for delay.
Persona acted on that understanding to its detriment by
incurring the costs of preparing and serving the statement
of claim. It seems to me that that situation also needs to
be taken into account in assessing the next factor on
which Persona places reliance.
5.26 The second factor relied on by Persona is a
conversation deposed to in the affidavits filed which is
said to have occurred, at the tribunal, between a member
of the solicitors firm representing Persona and a solicitor in
the Chief State Solicitor's Office who was involved in
representing State interests at the Moriarty Tribunal. It
does not appear that there is any evidence denying that
such a conversation took place. On that basis it seems
that the court must, on the evidence, conclude that there
was a conversation in which it was intimated on behalf of
Persona that the Persona proceedings would not be
progressing pending developments at the tribunal and
that no objection to that course of action was intimated on
behalf of the Minister either then or subsequently.
5.27 It seems to me that too great a weight cannot be
attached to what was a relatively informal conversation
which occurred while both solicitors happened to be
present at the tribunal. In order to properly comply with
the obligation to keep all other parties informed of any
proposed unorthodox conduct of proceedings (on the basis

of the analysis which I have earlier conducted) it seems to


me that something more formal than that casual
conversation was required. Nonetheless, it seems to me
that the fact of that conversation can be taken into
account in the overall assessment of excusability. In
addition, it seems to me that it would have been
reasonable for Persona, on receiving the relevant
correspondence extending time for filing a statement of
claim by 21 days, to have assumed that the Minister had
broadly accepted inaction up to that point in time, but
then wished the proceedings to progress.
5.28 Finally, attention was drawn to the fact that, when a
senior official of Persona was giving evidence before the
tribunal, counsel for the Minister put it to him that the
tribunal was being used as a "stalking horse" for the
proceedings; thus indicating, indirectly at least, an implicit
knowledge of the plaintiffs intended course on the part of
the Minister.
5.29 Taking all three factors together it seems to me that
the Minister must, at least in a general way, have been
aware of the fact that the respective plaintiffs (certainly in
the case of Persona and, by implication, it would follow
that of Comcast also) were awaiting developments at the
Moriarty Tribunal before progressing their claim.
5.30 It is next necessary to turn to the point made on
behalf of the Minister to the effect that, whatever might
have been the situation when the proceedings were
issued, at least from the time when the opening statement
on the GSM licence module was made by counsel for the
tribunal, both plaintiffs had sufficient information available
to formulate a statement of claim. It is again important not
to view matters with the benefit of hindsight. However, it
does need to be noted that it is in the nature of tribunals,
conducted as they are in an inquisitorial manner, that
developments are likely to occur as the hearings progress.
Developments of some materiality to the issues which
arise in both of these proceedings did in fact occur. While
it is unnecessary to set it out in detail, certain payments
alleged to have been routed to Mr. Lowry by Mr. O'Brien

through the English football club Doncaster Rovers were


the subject of developments at the tribunal which, in fact,
post-dated the time when the statements of claim in these
proceedings were filed. In that context it is said that there
may well be applications to amend the proceedings to
include further allegations based on what were said to be
the revelations made in that regard at the Moriarty
Tribunal. I express no view on whether such an
amendment could or should be allowed.
5.31 However, that fact does show that it was not
unrealistic to anticipate that there might be developments
as the proceedings at the tribunal continued. In fairness to
Persona and Comcast it does also need to be noted that it
was anticipated at the time when the module concerning
the GSM licence commenced that the tribunal would
complete the hearing of evidence on that module in a
relatively short period of time. As we all know that turned
out not to be the case. However, a decision to await
developments needs to be seen in the context both of the
likelihood that such developments might well occur and
the fact that it was anticipated that all relevant
information would be available in a relatively short period
of time. In that context I agree with the views of Hardiman
J. that there could be no basis for awaiting the result of the
tribunal itself. The views expressed by a tribunal may be of
considerable public importance. However, those views
could have no bearing on civil proceedings. It follows that,
while the parties might, undoubtedly, be very interested
to hear the conclusions of the tribunal, those conclusions
could have no effect on civil proceedings and therefore
awaiting the result of the tribunal's findings could not
provide any justification for delaying the progress of civil
proceedings. What is, at least in general terms, potentially
justified, is waiting to see what information may become
available through the exercise by the tribunal of its powers
of compellability. Any such waiting would necessarily only
justify delay up to the conclusion of the evidence hearing
process for, after that time, there could be no reasonable
expectation of any further material developments which
could have a bearing on the proceedings.

5.32 While it might be said that Persona and Comcast did,


when counsel for the tribunal's opening statement had
been completed, have a significant factual basis which
ought to have allowed a statement of claim to be
formulated in both cases, there does seem to me to be
some merit in the point made in response by counsel for
both plaintiffs. It was said that it was reasonable to
anticipate, given the fluid nature of tribunals, that there
would be developments. For the reasons already set out, I
am satisfied that that is a reasonable position to take.
However, counsel went further and suggested that if, as
the Minister argued, a statement of claim should have
been filed soon after the opening statement, there was a
very real likelihood that that statement of claim would
need to have been reassessed from time to time in the
light of developments at the tribunal (leading, in all
likelihood, to a number of amendments to the statements
of claim) and that, in those circumstances, it was
reasonable to await developments during the module
concerned with the GSM licence so as to be able to
formulate the claim in as comprehensive a fashion as
possible. In that context both counsel responded to the
point made on behalf of the State, to the effect that the
statements of claim may still need to be amended, by
drawing attention to the fact that both plaintiffs were
placed in a position where they had to file the best
statement of claim that they could or else face their
respective proceedings being dismissed. All in all I am
satisfied that it was not unreasonable for Persona and
Comcast to seek to await as many developments of the
Moriarty Tribunal, relative to their proceedings, as they
could before filing a statement of claim. However, it seems
to me that the point made against both Persona and
Comcast, which accuses both of having taken unilateral
action in that regard without putting the Minister on
notice, applies equally to the excuse tendered for failing to
file a statement of claim after the opening statement as it
does to the general excuse tendered for delay.
5.33 Taking all of those factors together, the matter which
causes me most concern is the fact that neither Persona
nor Comcast took any formal steps to inform the Minister

that it was their intention to, in effect, "park" the


proceedings pending developments at the Moriarty
Tribunal. By not adopting that formal position, it seems to
me that the Minister was, at least to some extent,
prejudiced by being deprived of the opportunity of taking
advice on, and taking whatever steps might be advised in
relation to, the situation which would then have become
clear. For that reason it does not seem to me that it can
properly be said that the delay in these cases is fully
excusable.
5.34 However, in assessing the extent to which delay
might nonetheless be blameworthy it seems to me that
the court must take into account the fact that, in the
context of an allegation of covert wrongdoing where a
public tribunal with significant powers of compellability
was conducting a highly relevant investigation, it was, at
least in general terms, reasonable to await developments.
It is the failure to make sufficiently clear that that course
of action was being adopted that leads me to conclude
that the delay is not fully excusable. For the reasons
already analysed I am not satisfied that pre-statement of
claim discovery could reasonably have been seen by
either plaintiff as being likely to provide the information
necessary to produce a statement of claim on the facts of
this case. In addition, while some reasonable detail must
have been available to both plaintiffs as soon as counsel's
opening statement at the tribunal had been made, it was
not, again at the level of principle, unreasonable to wait
for what then seemed likely to be a relatively short period
of time, to ascertain whether further information might
come out. The only real criticism that can be made of both
plaintiffs in that context was that it would, perhaps, have
been more prudent, as it became clear that the relevant
module was going to take a lot longer than was first
anticipated, to again adopt the formal position that the
statement of claim was to await further potential
developments at the tribunal, thus enabling the Minister to
take whatever action it might consider appropriate in the
light of that position being adopted. Finally, for the
reasons already analysed, I am satisfied that the Minister
must have been, at least in general terms, aware, despite

the fact that neither Persona nor Comcast had formally


notified it of the fact, that the proceedings were being
parked pending the developments of the Moriarty Tribunal.
5.35 In all those circumstances it seems to me that it is
appropriate to characterise this case as one where the
explanations given by both plaintiffs go some significant
way towards providing an excuse but do not render the
delay fully excusable in all the circumstances. In that
context it is, therefore, necessary to turn to the balance of
justice.
6
The Balance of Justice
6.1 On the facts of this case it seems to me that the
starting point for consideration of where the balance of
justice lies must be to give all proper recognition to the
fact that the delay in question, while inordinate, was, for
the reasons already analysed, in my view, significantly,
although not completely, excusable. In addition to that
factor, the issues which are raised in these proceedings
involve questions of high public interest. While that fact is
not, of itself, decisive, it does seem to me that some
significant weight needs to be attached to it. A definitive
ruling by a court of competent jurisdiction on the serious
questions of fact which lie at the heart of the allegations in
both of these cases is a matter to which appropriate
weight should be attached.
6.2 In all cases where the court has to consider the
balance of justice the extent of any prejudice to the
defendant caused by delay needs to be assessed. In that
context it is important to note that the Minister did not put
forward any claim to specific prejudice in the form of
absent witnesses or missing documentation. The Minister
sought solely to rely on the undoubted general prejudice
that may arise when any proceedings are conducted a
very long time after the events under scrutiny. It was in
that context that Gilligan J. characterised the State's
prejudice as moderate.
6.3 While one should not become overly enmeshed in
terminology on degree such as "mild", "moderate",
"severe" or "extreme", I would, respectfully, disagree with

Gilligan J. and would instead characterise the prejudice


established on behalf of the Minister in this case as being
mild. A number of factors need to be taken into account.
At least so far as many of the issues which are likely to
arise in these proceedings at trial are concerned, this case
can be regarded as a so-called "documents" case, where
there are contemporary records of much of the matters
which will require to be addressed in evidence. It is, of
course, the case that this is not a pure "documents" case
where the issues turn on the construction of documents
and where oral testimony is likely to be of only marginal
relevance. In such cases prejudice caused by delay will be
non-existent or extremely remote. However, the
availability of contemporary records will, in my view, at
least so far as a lot of the issues likely to arise are
concerned, minimise any risk of prejudice.
6.4 There are, it has to be said, some issues which are
likely to arise (if one takes into account the matters which
influenced the views of the Moriarty Tribunal and which
are, subject to appropriate evidence being capable of
being led, likely to figure at the trial of these respective
proceedings) which are not reflected in contemporary
documents. In that context counsel for the Minister drew
attention to a passage from my judgment in Stephens v.
Flynn Limited where, at p.13, I said the following:"He has not, however, been able to point to any specific
witness who is no longer available. It must also be taken
into account that there are, apparently, statements of the
relevant witnesses to the events of the 5th December,
1995 taken by the Garda on the occasion in question.
That being said an issue as to the credibility of witnesses
(which will almost certainly arise) will be all the more
difficult of resolution where those witnesses are being
asked to recollect matters that occurred so long ago. While
the prejudice may not be quite as great as the Defendant
contends for I am satisfied that it will nonetheless be of
some significance."
6.5 Based on that passage, it is said that, while the fact
that almost all of the witnesses likely to be called in these
proceedings will have made statements to the Moriarty

Tribunal in which they will have recorded their accounts is


a matter to which some weight can be given, it does not
displace the prejudice that may arise when the court is
called upon to assess the credibility of those witnesses.
The reasoning behind that passage from Stephens v. Flynn
Limited is that experience tells that a court, when faced
with having to choose between the accounts of two or
more witnesses and in the absence of contemporary
objective or forensic evidence which may give a clear
indication as to which account should be preferred, will
often have to base an assessment of the evidence on the
court's impression of both the truthfulness and accuracy of
the recollection of the witnesses concerned. In at least
some cases the choice may be difficult. In that context
little things can matter. Against that background, while the
fact that parties may, a long time ago, have made a
witness statement, which may provide some, but not too
great, assistance for the court in forming its impression of
the truthfulness of witnesses; ultimately the courts
assessment may turn on their ability to describe aspects
of the events not recorded in their witness statements.
6.6 However, the circumstances of this case are almost
unique. Not only have all (or almost all) likely witnesses
given careful written statements to the Moriarty Tribunal,
those witnesses have been the subject of exhaustive cross
examination on behalf of many interested parties and,
indeed, on examination by the tribunal itself. Thus any
likely points of detail on which the credibility of witnesses
might turn, even if not included in the relevant witnesses'
written statements to the tribunal, are likely to have
already been explored in oral testimony. That is not to say
that some further nuanced questions might not arise at a
trial of these proceedings. However, because the relevant
evidence has not only been recorded in writing but also
tested by cross-examination, it seems to me that the
likelihood of prejudice is significantly reduced.
6.7 Having regard, therefore, to the significant, although
not complete, excusability of the delay, to the significant
public interest in having these matters of high public
controversy determined in a court of law, and to the mild
level of any prejudice, I am satisfied that the balance of

justice in this case falls in favour of allowing the


proceedings to continue. I have come to that view despite
applying a stricter approach to excusability and the
balance of justice which, for the reasons already analysed,
I am satisfied is appropriate. However, it bears repeating
that the facts of this case are truly unique.
6.8 Having reached those conclusions it is necessary to
turn briefly to the second leg of the case made on behalf
of the Minister which was to the effect that the
proceedings should be dismissed, even in the absence of
any culpable delay, because of the real risk of an unfair
trial.
7
Risk of an Unfair Trial
7.1 Irrespective of whatever threshold might be
appropriate (and for the reasons already analysed it may
be that a somewhat higher threshold than that identified
in the existing jurisprudence might need to be considered
in an appropriate case) I am satisfied that the Minister has
failed to establish a sufficient risk of an unfair trial.
7.2 For the reasons already analysed I am satisfied that it
is appropriate to characterise the likely prejudice or
impairment to the Minister in the conduct of its defence as
being mild. While it is true that it is likely that the trial of
these proceedings will take place the best part of 20 years
after most of the events which will be under scrutiny,
nonetheless there are a whole series of unique factors
which render the conduct of such a trial nonetheless
unlikely to be unfair. For those reasons, it seems to me,
the second leg of the State's application must also fail.
8
Conclusions
8.1 For the reasons set out, I am, therefore, satisfied that
there was inordinate delay which, although significantly
excused, was not fully excusable. On that basis it is
necessary to consider the balance of justice. For the
reasons set out I am satisfied that that balance favours
the continuance of these proceedings.
8.2 Likewise I am satisfied that the Minister has failed to
establish the sort of impairment to his ability to conduct a
defence of these proceedings, or, indeed, any other delay-

induced unfairness, such as would warrant the dismissal of


the proceedings even if there were no culpable delay.
8.3 It is for those reasons that I support the ruling
already given to allow the appeals in both cases and
substitute an order dismissing the Minister's application on
each of the notices of motion before the court.
http://www.supremecourt.ie/Judgments.nsf/1b0757edc371032e8025
72ea0061450e/0ab3899c0dd469d880257a9a0053a660?
OpenDocument

Chief Justice Susan Denham ruled that the balance of


justice is in favour of the case proceeding. She said she
came to the decision after taking a number of factors into
account, including the fact that these proceedings make
serious allegations of corruption by a Minister of the
Government
THE SUPREME COURT
Appeals No. 216, 215 and 213
Denham C.J.
Hardiman J.
Fennelly J.
McKechnie J.
Clarke J.
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 9288P]

Between/
Comcast International Holdings Incorporated, Declan
Ganley, Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis OBrien, Ireland, and
the Attorney General
Defendants/Respondents
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 15119P]

Between/
Comcast International Holdings Incorporated, Declan
Ganley, Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis OBrien, Ireland, and
the Attorney General
Defendants/Respondents
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 9223P]

Between/
Persona Digital Telephony Limited, and Sigma Wireless
Networks Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Ireland and the Attorney
General
Defendants/Respondents
Reasons delivered on the 17th day of October, 2012 by
Denham C.J.
1.
These three appeals were heard together by this
appellate court, as they had been heard together by the
High Court.
2.
The appeals were heard on the 10th, 11th and 12th
July, 2012.
3.

On the 17th July, 2012, the Court indicated that it

would allow the appeals and that reasons would be given


in October.
4.
In this judgment I deliver the reasons why I would
allow the appeals.
5.
These proceedings were commenced consequent to
the decision of the Minister for Public Enterprise,
hereinafter referred to as the Minister, made on the 25th
October, 1995, to award the second GSM mobile
telephone licence, hereinafter referred to as the licence,
to ESAT Telecommunications Limited, hereinafter referred
to as ESAT. On the 2nd March, 1995, the Minister had
announced a bid process for the licence. The deadline for
receipt of tenders was extended on the 16th June, 1995,
from the 23rd June, 1995, to the 4th August, 1995, and the
result of the competition was announced on the 25th
October, 1995.
Three sets of proceedings
6.
The three sets of proceedings were commenced as
follows:(i) In the first set of proceedings the plaintiffs/appellants,
referred to as Comcast, issued a plenary summons on
the 15th June, 2001, which was served on the 14th June,
2002. The first set of proceedings relate primarily to the
decision of the Minister on the 16th June, 1995, to extend
the deadline of the 23rd June, 1995, for the receipt of
tenders for the award of the licence. The proceedings seek
a declaration that the decision is null and void, and there
is a claim for damages for alleged breach of statutory
duty, misfeasance in public office, breach of or procuring a
breach of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906, fraud,
deceit, breach of duty and breach of contract. The
defendants/respondents, excluding the State
defendants/respondents, are referred to as the
respondents. The State defendants/respondents, who are
referred to as the State, entered an appearance on the
20th June, 2002. A statement of claim was delivered on
the 3rd June, 2005.
6. (ii) In the second set of proceedings serious allegations

were made by Comcast; primarily the cause of action and


the remedies sought are in relation to the decision of the
25th October, 1995. The plenary summons was issued on
the 10th October, 2001 and served on the 4th October,
2002. An appearance was entered on behalf of the State
on the 16th December, 2002. A statement of claim was
served on the 3rd June, 2005.
6. (iii) In the third set of proceedings a plenary summons
was issued by the plaintiffs/appellants, hereinafter referred
to as Persona, on the 15th June, 2001, which was served
on the 10th June, 2002. The summons claimed damages
(including exemplary damages) for misfeasance in public
office, breach of duty, including statutory duty, breach of
contract, breach of legitimate expectations of Persona,
breach of constitutional rights of Persona, breach of rights
under EU law, and a declaration that the European
Communities (Mobiles and Personal Communications)
Regulations 1996, hereinafter referred to as the
Regulations of 1996, contravene EU law. An appearance
was entered on behalf of the State on the 20th June, 2002.
The statement of claim was delivered on the 21st April,
2006.
Motions
7.
The State brought motions, dated the 26th May,
2006, and filed on the 29th May, 2006, giving notice that
on the 26th June, 2006 at 11.00 a.m., or at the first
available opportunity thereafter, counsel for the Minister,
Ireland and the Attorney General would apply for the
following reliefs:(i)
An order, pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the
court, dismissing the proceedings as against the Minister,
Ireland and the Attorney General, for delay and/or want of
prosecution.
(ii) An order, pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the
court, dismissing the proceedings as against the Minister,
Ireland, and the Attorney General, in the interests of
justice.
(iii) Such further and ancillary orders as the court may
deem proper and appropriate

8.
The motions were heard by the High Court (Gilligan
J.) on the 8th and 9th February, 2007, and judgment was
delivered on the 13th June, 2007. On the 3rd July, 2007,
the High Court through its orders dismissed for inordinate
and inexcusable delay Personas action and both actions
taken by Comcast. The orders were perfected on the 9th
July, 2007.
The High Court Judgment
9. (i) In the High Court, the learned High Court judge found
that there was no significance material difference between
the applications brought by the State and the grounds of
defence raised by Comcast and Persona, referred to as
the appellants, and as a consequence all three motions
were heard together. The High Court decided to deliver
one judgment in respect of the three motions on the three
sets of proceedings.
9. (ii) The learned High Court judge held that there was no
dispute between the parties that the delay was inordinate.
So, the first issue that arose for determination in the High
Court was whether or not the delay was inexcusable. The
learned High Court judge held:My overall conclusion is that I do not consider that the
excuses offered by [the appellants] and, in particular, that
they were monitoring the hearings of the Moriarty Tribunal
into the award of the second GSM mobile telephone
licence and, hence, did not deliver a statement of claim,
an explanation that constitutes a valid excuse and,
accordingly, I come to the conclusion that the delay
involved in the prosecution of all three claims herein is not
only inordinate but also inexcusable. The delay, in my
view, goes beyond the minimum which may be considered
inordinate.
9. (iii) As the High Court had come to the conclusion that
the delay was inordinate and inexcusable, that Court
moved on to consider whether the balance of justice
favoured the advancement, or not, of the proceedings.
The High Court pointed out that no case was made by the
State of any specific prejudice having occurred by reason
of the inordinate and unreasonable delay. The learned

High Court judge stated that the appellants and the State
had contributed to the delay involved. He also stated:In the particular circumstances of this case all the parties
who are involved in these three sets of proceedings were
parties with an interest in the matters being dealt with at
the Moriarty Tribunal. The relevant parties to these
proceedings were present on every hearing date relating
to any matters touching on the subject matter of these
proceedings.
9. (iv) The High Court stated that the State would suffer a
presumed prejudice if the appellants were permitted to
proceed with their actions, and assessed the prejudice as
moderate. Having analysed the situation further he
stated:I come to the conclusion that where responsibility for
inordinate and inexcusable delay rests primarily with the
[appellants], where there is presumed prejudice of a
moderate nature, where the issues to be determined are
of a very substantial commercial nature, where the actions
leading to the delay involved are deliberate and conscious,
where the prospects of a fair trial have been undermined,
where the [appellants] have failed after a late start to
advance their proceedings expeditiously, the balance of
justice favours the dismissal of the proceedings and,
accordingly, I dismiss the [appellants] proceedings as
against the [State] for want of prosecution.
9. (v) The High Court also addressed the application
brought pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the Court
to dismiss the appellants claim in the interests of justice,
where reliance was placed on Article 6 of the European
Convention on Human Rights. Reference was made to
ODomhnaill v. Merrick [1984] I.R. 151; Toal v. Duignan
(No. 1) [1991] ILRM 135; Toal v. Duignan (No. 2) [1991]
ILRM 140, especially at pp. 142 143; and McMullen v.
Ireland (ECtHR application No. 42297/98, 29th July, 2004.)
The learned High Court judge held:In my view, for this Court to be asked in 2009 to
determine primarily issues of fact that will have occurred
at the time of the prospective hearing date some 14 years
previously, gives rise to a basic unfairness of procedures,
undermines the [States] ability to have a fair trial, creates
a clear and patent unfairness in asking the [State] to

defend the action, and clearly fails to provide the [State]


with a hearing within a reasonable time of the alleged
cause of action having occurred. In essence, in my view, in
a case such as this, it puts justice to the hazard to such
an extent that it would be a derogation (sic) of basic
fairness to allow the case to proceed to trial as per
Henchy J. in ODomhnaill at p. 158. In these
circumstances, I come to the conclusion pursuant to the
inherent jurisdiction of the court to dismiss the
[appellants] claim as against the [State].
Notice of Appeal
10. Comcast issued a notice of appeal on the 27th July,
2007. Inter alia, the grounds of appeal were that the
learned trial judge erred in fact and in law in considering
that the appellants delay was inexcusable; that the
learned trial judge erred in law and in fact in considering
that the balance of justice was against allowing the case
to proceed; and that the learned trial judge erred in
considering that the appellants proceedings should be
struck out in the interests of justice. Persona issued a
notice of appeal on the 25th July, 2007. Inter alia, its
grounds of appeal were that the learned trial judge erred
in law and fact in determining that delay was inexcusable;
that the balance of justice favoured the dismissal of the
proceedings; and that the State wrote to Persona stating
that if a statement of claim was not delivered within 21
days then a motion for dismissal of proceedings would
issue and consented to the late filing of the statement of
claim if it was delivered within 21 days
Issue Paper
11. An issue paper was produced by the State and was
before the Court. It set out issues for the Court as follows:11. (i) Is this delay in these cases excusable (the
appellants having already conceded the delay was
inordinate) by reason of the following:(i) the decision of the appellants to adopt a wait and see
policy in respect of the hearings of the Moriarty Tribunal,
the Tribunal, having regard to the specific allegations
made by the appellants in their pleadings when the cases

were initiated;
(ii) the appellants contention that if the appellants had
attempted to bring on the proceedings during the Tribunal
hearings the State would have resisted this course;
(iii) Personas assertion that the State did not believe the
proceedings were dormant having regard to (a) a
statement by the former solicitor for Persona to a solicitor
from the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, in response to a
query by the latter, that no statement of claim would be
delivered in the proceedings for the foreseeable future
as Persona were following the Tribunal, and (b) the
delivery of a 21 day letter by the Office of the Chief State
Solicitor to Persona seeking delivery of a statement of
claim within 21 days under threat of a motion to strike out
in default;
(iv) the nature and extent of the States own
inaction/delay;
(v) the nature of and the issues in the proceedings;
(vi) the time that has elapsed since the events giving rise
to these proceedings.
11. (ii) Was the trial judge correct in law in holding that the
balance of the interests of justice required the appellants
claims to be dismissed, having regard to:
(i) the overall delay in the proceedings and the relative
contributions of the appellants and the State respectively
to same;
(ii) the deliberate and conscious nature of the decision of
the appellants to wait and see;
(iii) the holding of the existence of prejudice of a modest
nature to the State;
(iv) the likely nature and extent of the issues and evidence
at the trial;
(v) the finding that to ask the State to defend the
proceedings would be unfair and undermine their ability to

have a fair trial;


(vi) the effect of the provisions of Article 6 of the
European Convention on Human Rights;
(vii) the exercise by the learned trial judge of his discretion
having regard to the matters referred to in his judgment
as set out above.
Law
12. In all the circumstances, the primary relevant law is
that stated in Primor Plc v. Stokes Kennedy Crowley [1996]
2 I.R. 495, hereinafter referred to as Primor, where the
issue was whether proceedings should be dismissed for
want of prosecution. In delivering a judgment, Hamilton
C.J., at p. 475, summarised the relevant principles of law
as follows:(a) the courts have an inherent jurisdiction to control
their own procedure and to dismiss a claim when the
interests of justice require them to do so;
(b) it must, in the first instance, be established by the
party seeking a dismissal of proceedings for want of
prosecution on the ground of delay in the prosecution
thereof, that the delay, was inordinate and inexcusable;
(c) even where the delay has been both inordinate and
inexcusable the court must exercise a judgment on
whether, in its discretion, on the facts the balance of
justice is in favour of or against the proceeding of the
case;
(d) in considering this latter obligation the court is entitled
to take into consideration and have regard to
(i) the implied constitutional principles of basic fairness of
procedures,
(ii) whether the delay and consequent prejudice in the
special facts of the case are such as to make it unfair to
the defendant to allow the action to proceed and to make
it just to strike out the plaintiff's action,

(iii) any delay on the part of the defendant - because


litigation is a two party operation, the conduct of both
parties should be looked at,
(iv) whether any delay or conduct of the defendant
amounts to acquiescence on the part of the defendant in
the plaintiff's delay,
(v) the fact that conduct by the defendant which induces
the plaintiff to incur further expense in pursuing the action
does not, in law, constitute an absolute bar preventing the
defendant from obtaining a striking out order but is a
relevant factor to be taken into account by the judge in
exercising his discretion whether or not to strike out the
claim, the weight to be attached to such conduct
depending upon all the circumstances of the particular
case,
(vi) whether the delay gives rise to a substantial risk that
it is not possible to have a fair trial or is likely to cause or
have caused serious prejudice to the defendant,
(vii) the fact that the prejudice to the defendant referred
to in (vi) may arise in many ways and be other than that
merely caused by the delay, including damage to a
defendant's reputation and business.
These are the principles of law relevant to the appeals
before the Court. This is not an appeal relating to a
criminal trial, and thus the law as to delay and a criminal
trial does not apply.
13. The nature of an inordinate and inexcusable delay
requires to be considered in all the circumstances of the
case. Thus, the factors of each case require to be
analysed.
In addition, in recent times there has been an
acknowledgement that cases may not be let lie, in a
laissez faire attitude, for the parties to move. There is a
requirement to ensure that cases are progressed
reasonably. This approach has been the subject of
litigation in Ireland and has also been addressed by the

European Court on Human Rights. For example, in Price


and Lowe v. The United Kingdom 43185/98, there was an
application alleging a violation of Article 6 of the
Convention in connection with the length of the
proceedings at issue. Article 6 provides:
"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ...,
everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable
time..."
The ECtHR reiterated that the reasonableness of the
length of the proceedings must be addressed in the light
of the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the
criteria laid down in the Court's case law, in particular:

The complexity of the case,

The conduct of the applicant,

The conduct of the relevant authorities, and

The importance of what is at stake for the applicant


in the litigation.
The Court held that the manner in which a State provides
for mechanisms to comply with this requirement - whether
by way of increasing the number of judges, or by
automatic time-limits and directions, or by some other
method - is for the State to decide. In this case the
domestic law is that stated in Primor, where the factors
identified by Hamilton C.J., as set out previously, are not
dissimilar to the criteria set out in Price.
Decision
14. As indicated on the 17th July, 2012, I would allow the
appeals. Consequently the proceedings may continue in
the High Court, for the following reasons.
Reasons
Issues
15. On behalf of the appellants it was submitted that
there were three issues to be determined:(i)
Is the delay an excusable delay? (It was accepted
that it was an inordinate delay).

(ii) If it was not excusable does the balance of justice


mean it should be struck out?
(iii) There was a free standing issue as to whether the
interests of justice enable the claim to be dismissed.
I shall follow this sequence in giving my reasons.
In essence, as it was accepted that there was inordinate
delay by the appellants, at issue was whether the delay by
the appellants was excusable in all the circumstances of
the case.
Facts
16. The dates as to the proceedings in these appeals are
not in issue, as they are not contested. The dates when
the proceedings were issued, were delivered, and the
various steps taken, are not disputed and have been set
out earlier in this judgment.
Primor inordinate delay
17. The relevant law is as described above by Hamilton
C.J. in Primor.
18. Thus, the first issue is whether there has been
inordinate delay by the appellants in moving the
proceedings. The relevant time period to consider whether
or not there was inordinate delay was from the
commencement of the proceedings until the delivery of
the statement of claim. Both Comcast and Persona
accepted that there was inordinate delay. Thus, the first
aspect of the test under Primor was met.
Primor inexcusable delay
19. The second issue to address is whether the delay was
excusable.
Claim of corruption
20. In considering this case the serious and important
nature of the matters of corruption claimed by the
appellants is a relevant factor.
21. Thus, for example, the plenary summons issued by
Comcast, on the 10th October, 2001, claims that the
decision to award the licence to Esat is unlawful and void,
and damages are sought on a number of alleged bases,
including misfeasance in public office, fraud, and deceit.

22. In the statement of claim, delivered on the 3rd June,


2005, Comcast claims:Wrongfully, and in breach of contract, breach of duty and
breach of statutory duty, the Minister interfered with the
integrity of the tender process. He abused his public office
by intervening in the tender process to ensure that the
licence be awarded to Esat. He accepted payments made
by or on behalf of Esat and/or Denis OBrien to ensure the
award of the licence to Esat and/or to reward the Minister
for having intervened to ensure the awarding of the
licence to Esat. In doing so, he breached the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1906. In representing the tender process
and the award of the licence to Esat as having been the
result of a fair and honest tender process, he engaged in
fraud and deceit and abused his office.
23. In both of the statements of claim, in each of the
proceedings, Comcast stated explicitly that it was unable
to give full particulars of the wrongdoing of the Minister,
pending the conclusion of the investigations the subject of
inquiry by the Tribunal.
24. However, on the basis of the information disclosed at
the public hearings of the Tribunal to that date, Comcast
stated that it is clear that the Minister engaged in the
following forms of wrongdoing:(a) The Minister compromised the integrity of the tender
process by breaching the guidelines for communications
with bidders:
i. On August 16th 1995, while the bids were being
evaluated, the Minister met with the chairman of one of
the bidders, the Persona Consortium, and discussed that
consortium's bid;
ii. On September 15th 1995, the Minister met with Mr Tony
O'Reilly, a representative of another bidder, the AT&T
consortium, and made reference to that consortium's bid;
iii. In September 1995, the Minister met with Denis O'Brien
and suggested that IIU Nominees Limited ("IIU") should
become involved in the Esat consortium.

(b) The Minister, his servants or agents disclosed or


caused to be disclosed confidential information in relation
to the bid process to Esat;
i. Esat was informed of the fact that the competition
structure was to be changed from a "straight auction" to
"beauty contest" and of the extension of the bidding
process prior to any such information being -disclosed to
the other bidders;
ii. The Minister, his servants or agents, informed Esat of
the contents of discussions with the European Commission
in relation to the imposition of a cap on the licence fee.
Access to this information placed Esat at a significant
competitive advantage;
iii. The Minister, his servants or agents disclosed or caused
to be disclosed certain of the weightings to be applied to
the evaluation of bids.
(c) The Minister modified the terms of and unlawfully
interfered with the tender process to favour Esat.
i. The Minister, his servants or agents intervened to ensure
the imposition of the cap of 15m on the licence fee;
ii. The Minister amended the timing of key milestones in
the tender process, including the final date by which
tender bids were to be lodged. The original closing date
for receipt of submissions of tenders was June 23rd 1995.
This date was extended to August 4th 1995. The purpose
and effect of the extension of this deadline was to favour
Esat;
iii. The evaluation methodology was modified with the aim
and effect of favouring Esat.
iv. The Minister intervened in the substantive evaluation
process to ensure that the choice of successful bid was
determined other than by reference to the
recommendation of the project group;
v. The Minister failed to conduct any or any appropriate
assessment to satisfy himself as to the financial and/or
technical capacity of Esat prior to the award of the licence;

vi. Notwithstanding the Minister's knowledge that the Esat


bid lacked reasonable financial capability, the Minister
nonetheless awarded the licence to Esat;
vii. The Minister expedited the selection and
announcement of the successful bid and, in so doing,
failed to have any or any adequate regard to the final
evaluation report prepared by the external consultants
("AMI") appointed to advise on the evaluation of bids,
which report did not identify a definitive winner. The
Minister made a public announcement on October 25th
1995 to the effect that the competition was won by Esat
prior to the presentation of the final evaluation report to
the Department, and prior to the consideration of that
report by the project group;
viii. The Minister unlawfully procured or facilitated the
entry of IIU into the Esat consortium after the submission
by Esat of its bid on August 4th 1995. In so permitting a
post-submission amendment to the bid, he breached the
rules of the tender process;
ix. The Minister was aware of the involvement of IIU in the
bid prior to the award of the licence to Esat. Nonetheless,
he failed to take any steps to assess the financial capacity
of the Esat consortium to the detriment of the other
bidders. No assessment of the financial standing of IIU was
conducted by the Minister, his servants or agents, until
May 1996, prior to the signing of the licence agreement by
the Minister;
x. The Minister abused his position prior to the award of
licence to Esat by intervening with the Electricity Supply
Board ("ESB") to ensure that Esat would be permitted to
erect masts on ESB pylons;
(d) The Minister accepted improper payments made by
Denis O'Brien and/or Esat which payments were made to
influence the outcome of the tender process and/or to
reward the Minister for having intervened to ensure the
awarding of the licence to Esat.

i. Subsequent to the announcement of the decision to


award the licence to Esat, the sum of US$50,000 was paid,
in December 1995, by Esat to an offshore account
operated by David Austin, a senior Fine Gael fundraiser.
The sum of 50,000 was paid by David Austin to Fine Gael
on May 6th 1997. The said sum was repaid on March 2nd
1998. Fine Gael indicated that it could not accept the
payment of the sum which Mr O'Brien claimed to have
been a donation from Esat. [Comcast] contend that the
payment of US$50,000 was intended by Denis O'Brien to
influence the outcome of the tender process and/or to
ensure that Esat was awarded the licence and/or to reward
the Minister for having intervened to ensure the awarding
of the licence to Esat;
ii. The Minister accepted the sum of 100,000 paid by
Denis O'Brien in early/mid-1996. The aim and effect of this
payment was to influence the outcome of the tender
process and/or to reward the Minister for having
intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to Esat;
iii. In July 1996, Denis O'Brien arranged for the payment of
150,000 to David Austin, who transferred the sum of
147,000 to the Minister. The aim and effect of the
transfer of funds from Denis O'Brien to David Austin and
subsequently to the Minister was to influence the outcome
of the tender process and/or to reward the Minister for
having intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to
Esat;
iv. Denis O'Brien financed the purchase of a property in
Mansfield, England acquired by the Minister. The aim and
effect of the provision of finance for the acquisition of the
Mansfield property was to influence the outcome of the
tender process and/or to reward the Minister for having
intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to Esat.
And [Comcast] reserve[d] the right to deliver further
particulars hereof at any time before the trial of this
action.
25. In the statement of claim delivered by Persona, on
the 21st April, 2006, it was claimed, inter alia, that about
the 2nd March, 1995, a conspiracy was hatched whereby

the Minister for Public Enterprise, its servants or agents,


and/or the Minister, conspired with another, namely Esat,
its servants or agents, to promote an inevitable
competition result. In the furtherance of the conspiracy
the parties infiltrated or penetrated the competition and/or
in the alternative ignored or disregarded the competition
process and/or in the alternative utilised the process for
the purpose of concealment and thereby ensuring the
granting of the licence to Esat. Also, it is claimed that on
dates unknown the Minister, its servants or agents, acting
in purported exercise of their powers and functions and
purportedly acting in the best interests of the public, but
the Minister acted unlawfully and maliciously and
committed an act or acts, or knowingly acted ultra vires or
acted with reckless indifference and as such, they
deliberately or dishonestly abused the power conferred,
abused authority, abused trust with the known
consequences that it would cause injury and damage to
Persona. There is a claim for special damages. There is
also a claim for aggravated, punitive and exemplary
damages on the basis, inter alia, of the seriousness of the
corrupt practices engaged in; the fact that the corrupt
practices were at the highest level, i.e. they involved the
Minister; the fact that the Minister abused his office and
his authority and breached trust; the fact that the Minister
used his office for a personal self serving purpose; the fact
that the corrupt practices were not merely opportunistic
but were carefully planned and designed; the fact that the
Minister wantonly and unlawfully utilised his position of
trust in disregard of the public interest.
Affidavits
26. The reasons for the delay by Comcast and Persona
were stated on affidavit by Damien Young and William
Jolley, respectively.
27. Damien Young deposed that at the time of issuing the
proceedings, Comcast believed that the award of the
licence was wrongful. He stated that the subject matter of
these proceedings was also the subject matter of the
Tribunal and that it had been anticipated that the Tribunal
would have completed its work in relation to the licence
module within a one year following the issuing of the

plenary summons, i.e. by June 2002. He deposed:


Unfortunately, this was not the case. When Damien
Young deposed his affidavit on the 23rd June, 2006, the
licence module of the Tribunal had not yet been
completed. The module had been going on for years, and
was suspended for a time pending an appeal to this Court.
28. Damien Young explained:At the time of the issuing of the proceedings, [Comcast]
believed that the award of the second GSM licence to
[Esat], was wrongful. However, [Comcast] were not in a
position to know the detail of the manner, nature and
extent of the breaches of the tender process. They hoped
that this detail would be clarified by the Moriarty Tribunal,
permitting the delivery by [Comcast] of a particularised
Statement of Claim.
29. Damien Young deposed that while he accepted that
there had been delay, he deposed that it was excusable as
the subject matter of the proceedings was also the subject
matter of continued investigation by the Tribunal. He
stated that the complexity of the subject matter of these
proceedings is evident from the time taken by the Tribunal
in investigating the matter. He stated that Comcast cannot
be expected to be aware of all the details of the improper
payments and conduct which Comcast believe resulted in
the award of the licence to Esat. He deposed that it was
reasonable for Comcast to await the information provided
in the public hearings of the Tribunal prior to the delivery
of the Statement of Claim. He also deposed that there was
no particular prejudice suffered by the State.
30. In his affidavit William Jolley deposed, inter alia, that
the interference by the Minister was a complete abuse by
the Minister of his office. In 1996 Persona had made a
complaint to the European Union in relation to the manner
in which the competition for the grant of the licence was
conducted, but was told that the matter was essentially
one for the Irish courts. He deposed that in May, 2001, the
Tribunal indicated that it was commencing investigations
into the circumstances in which the Minister, Michael
Lowry, granted the licence to Esat. He stated that this
announcement by the Tribunal confirmed the concerns of

Persona into the grant of the licence and a decision was


made to issue the within proceedings.
31. He deposed:9. The Moriarty Tribunal went into public session in
relation to the circumstances surrounding the grant of the
said licence in December, 2002. The [Minister] has been
represented at the public hearings by Mr. Shaw (on behalf
of the Chief State Solicitor's Office). [Personas] former
solicitors, and in particular Mr. Gerald Moloney and John
O'Donovan, have attended more or less every public
sitting of the Tribunal since 2001. Mr. Moloney has
informed me that on a number of occasions casual
conversations have taken place between him and Mr.
Shaw.
In particular, I am informed by Mr. Moloney that
not long after the service of the proceedings Mr. Moloney
met Mr. Shaw at the Tribunal and was asked by Mr. Shaw if
he was going to deliver a Statement of Claim. Mr. Moloney
told Mr. Shaw that he would not be delivering it for the
foreseeable future for the very reason that the [Persona]
(and their representatives) would firstly be following the
evidence which was likely to unfold at the Tribunal. Mr.
Moloney informs me that at no stage did Mr. Shaw object
to this proposed course of action and indeed if anything
appeared to be relieved as his Clients had more than
enough to do in dealing with the Tribunal.
10. Having regard to the constant attendance by the
[Personas] legal representatives at the Tribunal and the
aforementioned conversations, the [State] are well aware
of [Personas} intention to prosecute these proceedings.
During the course of the Tribunal hearings Tony Boyle, a
director of [Persona], has given evidence and has been
subjected to cross examination by Counsel on behalf of
the [Minister]. During the course of that cross examination
Counsel for the [Minister] has referred to the existence of
the proceedings and while suggesting that the Tribunal is
being used as "a kind of stalking horse" for the
proceedings (which Mr. Boyle did not accept) never made
any complaint about any alleged delay or prejudice being
suffered by the Minister or any of the other State

Defendants.
11. The within proceedings are serious and complex and
involve the assimilation of a large volume of information
and evidence. Certain information and avenues of inquiry
have been identified during the course of the public
sittings which have assisted [Persona] in the preparation
of their case and the assimilation of evidence outside of
the Tribunal. The prosecution of the case is not, however,
dependent upon any particular finding by the Moriarty
Tribunal and it is [Personas] intention to proceed with
these proceedings irrespective of what conclusion the
Moriarty Tribunal may come to.
12. Representatives of the [State] have given evidence to
the Moriarty Tribunal as to their involvement in the licence
competition. That module of the Moriarty Tribunal has not
been completed yet as far as I am aware no complaint has
ever been made by or on behalf of the [State] or the
officials of the Department of any prejudice due to the
remove in time between the Tribunal hearings and the
events under investigation dating back to 1995.
Furthermore, it is apparent from the public hearings of the
Tribunal that considerable documentation is available to
assist the various Department officials in their recollection
of events where such is necessary.
13. The timing of the issue of the current motion is of
significance. As appears from exhibit "MS1" to Mr. Shaw's
Affidavit no complaint was made between 2002 and 2006
in respect of [Personas] failure to deliver a Statement of
Claim. On the 23rd March, 2006 I served on the Chief
State Solicitor's Office a Notice of Change of Solicitor.
Within a week of receipt of that letter Mr. Shaw wrote to
me seeking the delivery of a Statement of Claim and
consenting to its delivery within 21 days. Nowhere in that
letter does Mr. Shaw complain of any prejudice; on the
contrary, he invites [Persona] to proceed with their claim
and it is difficult to understand what has occurred between
that date (31st March, 2006) and 26th May, 2006 to bring
about such a fundamental change in approach. [Persona]
believe[s], and I concur, that the request for the delivery

of a Statement of Claim made immediately after the


service of a Notice of Change of Solicitor was done so to
"catch the plaintiffs on the hop. I had in fact sought a
short extension of the 21 day period on 5th , 11th and
21st April, 2006 but never received any response to that
request. I beg to refer to copies of the three letters upon
which marked with the letter "WJ" I have endorsed my
name prior to the swearing hereof. Furthermore, I also
rang the Office of the Chief State Solicitor on a number of
occasions and left messages but my calls were largely
ignored and disregarded. In fact, the Statement of Claim
was delivered within the 21 day period allowed in the
letter of 31st March, 2006.
Application to strike out proceedings
32. As may be seen from the affidavit of William Jolley,
quoted previously, the position of Persona was also that
they were following the evidence likely to unfold at the
Tribunal. Further, that the State were aware of this
approach.
33. On Monday the 9th May, 2005, the High Court (Kelly
J.) ordered in both of the proceedings by Comcast that
unless Comcast do within 28 days from the 9th May, 2005,
deliver a statement of claim to the fourth named
defendant, Mr. Denis OBrien, that Comcasts claims would
stand dismissed for want of prosecution as against the
fourth named defendant for failure to deliver a statement
of claim within the time prescribed by the Rules of the
Superior Court.
34. The statements of claim in both Comcast proceedings
were delivered on the 3rd June, 2005, i.e. within the time
required by the order of the High Court.
35. Thus, Comcast had met the requirements of the High
Court order.
36. On the 28th July, 2005, the solicitors for the fourth
named defendant sought further particulars in the
Comcast proceedings. The replies to notice for particulars
are dated the 12th January, 2006. On the 7th March, 2006,
a notice of change of solicitor on behalf of the fourth

named defendant was filed. On the 15th May, 2006, a


defence and counterclaim on behalf of the fourth named
defendant was served. On the 14th November, 2006, a
defence to the counterclaim was delivered on behalf of
Comcast, and notice of particulars sought on behalf of
Comcast on the counterclaim.
37. It was in the midst of these circumstances that, on
the 26th May, 2006, the State issued the motion, the
subject of this appeal, to dismiss the proceedings against
the State.
Decision on excusability
38. It is clear from the evidence before the High Court
and this Court that the primary reason for the delay in the
proceedings was the decision taken by Comcast and
Persona to await the completion of the investigative
section of the Tribunal into the granting of the licence.
39. Usually a deliberate decision by a party to delay
proceedings is not excusable, but this case is unique for a
number of reasons. These reasons include the following:
(i) The facts which form the foundation for the claim were
being investigated by a Tribunal of Inquiry at the same
time as the proceedings were contemplated and then
commenced.
(ii) The nature of the facts alleged are very serious and
rare, i.e. a claim of corruption of a Minister of the
Government.
(iii) In addition, the facts in such proceedings are of their
nature very difficult to expose and particularize.
(iv) Also, the case is complex.
(v) Counsel for Comcast put the matter starkly, stating
that the excuse for the delay was that the appellants were
not in a position to prosecute the claim in any wholly
informed way until they were educated by the
investigative hearings of the Tribunal.

(vi) It is relevant also that during the time in issue the


State took no active step to advance the court
proceedings. On the facts, the State took no steps to
advance the proceedings from the serving of the three
plenary summonses in 2002 to April, 2006, when the State
gave consent to the late filing, within a specific time, of
Personas statement of claim in April, 2006, which was
delivered within that time on the 21st April, 2006.
However, the State, in May, 2006, issued motions to
dismiss for want of prosecution each of Personas and
Comcasts proceedings, which became the subject of this
appeal.
In contrast to the States inaction, a natural person, Mr
Denis OBrien, who is the fourth named defendant in the
Comcast proceedings, in late 2004, sought to dismiss for
want of prosecution Comcasts claims against him by
application to the Master of the High Court, which was
refused, and then by application to the High Court, which
was also refused if Comcast delivered its statement of
claim to Mr OBrien within 28 days of the order of the High
Court, which was made on the 9th May, 2005. Comcast
delivered the statement of claim to Mr OBrien within the
time limit set by the order and delivered the statement of
claim to the State on the 3rd June, 2005. Mr OBrien then
sought particulars from Comcast, which were provided by
Comcast in January, 2006, and Mr OBrien delivered a
defence and counterclaim in May, 2006, to which Comcast
responded to in November, 2006.
Thus, the High Court addressed the issue of delay in 2005
and required the statement of claim to be delivered rather
than dismiss the proceedings; the sequence of events that
followed demonstrated the engagement by Comcast with
a party who sought to advance the progression of the
proceedings in 2005 and 2006 and provides context to
view the States response to the appellants proceedings.
In all the unique circumstances of this case, there was, at
the very least, a de facto acquiescence in the delay in the
proceedings on the States behalf.
(vii) The inaction of the State between 2002 to 2006 in

these proceedings even continued after the statements of


claim of Comcast were delivered, when they failed to react
to the delivery of the first two statements of claim in 2005.
The State did not proceed to seek particulars such as
would be expected in a complex case.
(viii) During those years, 2002 to 2006, all the parties, to
one degree or another, were engaged in and monitoring
the investigations of the Tribunal into the granting of the
licence.
(ix) An unusual feature of the case is that, as a
consequence of the Tribunal inquiries, witnesses have
made statements and given oral evidence relevant to the
granting of the licence. Consequently, evidence has been
gathered because of the investigative hearings of the
Tribunal. Thus, while the appellants would need to present
their evidence in proceedings before the courts, this is not
a case where, years after an event, with no intervening
warning, defendants are required to defend a claim.
(x) The State was on notice of the appellants approach,
i.e. of the appellants decision to wait until the
investigative section of the Tribunal into the granting of
the licence had progressed, before serving the statements
of claim. This notice may have been express, in
accordance with the evidence deposed by William Jolley,
as set out above, of conversations between Mr. Moloney
and Mr. Shaw. It was not contradicted. Or the position may
have been implied. Whichever way the situation is
considered the facts are that the State was participating in
the Tribunal, had been served with the plenary
summonses in these proceedings, and yet took no step to
seek to advance these proceedings during these years.
Indeed, the State did not object until the 29th May, 2006,
when it filed its motions to dismiss for delay and/or want
of prosecution. I take this, at the very least, as a de facto
acquiescence in the delay in the proceedings pending the
conclusion of the investigative sessions of the Tribunal, in
all the unique circumstances of the case.
(xi) Persona relied on the letter of the 31st March, 2006,

as indicating the States position. The letter stated:Please note that if you do not file a statement of claim on
behalf of your clients within 21 days from the date hereof,
I am instructed to proceed with a notice of motion, seeking
to strike out these proceedings for want of prosecution,
without further notice to you.
You might further note that on behalf of the [State], I
hereby consent to the late filing of the statement of claim
by you up to and including 21 days from date hereof.
Persona responded by delivering their statement of claim
within 21 days. Personas reliance on the terms of the
letter including the consent to the late filing of the
statement of claim, was a reasonable position.
(xii) In the special circumstances, because of the nature of
the claim of corruption, where it is alleged that the wrongs
in this case were concealed, and covert, this approach by
the appellants, and indeed by the State, is
understandable. The Tribunal was investigating the wrongs
claimed by the appellants, it had the resources, and could
compel witnesses to advance its investigation into the
circumstances of the licence.
(xiii) Of course, the findings of the Tribunal are, under
current law, not admissible in the civil proceedings, and
the appellants do not seek to admit such findings.
However, the investigations of the Tribunal have exposed
information, facts, documents, and witnesses of assistance
to the appellants. The appellants awaited the completion
of the investigative stages of the Tribunal they did not
await the Report.
(xiv) No actual prejudice was found to attach to the State.
The learned High Court judge held that:While no actual prejudice has been referred to, I am
satisfied that there is presumed prejudice on a moderate
level.
However, there was no claim of specific prejudice to the
State, such as the death of a witness. References as to
prejudice were general, such as in the grounding affidavit

of Mr. Shaw where he states at paragraph 13 [w]hile the


statement of claim was delivered, I say the plaintiffs delay
has been inordinate and inexcusable and therefore
prejudicial []. The submissions to this Court have a
section on prejudice, where issues such as reputational
damage and the difficulty of meeting the award of
damages, inter alia, are considered. In fact, in the absence
of an evidential foundation for a finding of specific
prejudice, e.g. no absence of witnesses alleged, no
concrete difficulty alleged, any analysis of the issue of
prejudice would be a matter of speculation.
40. In general, it is not open to a party to decide
unilaterally not to proceed with proceedings in a case for a
particular time and reasons. However, in the interest of
fair and just proceedings, there are exceptions. This is one
such exception, where in the interests of justice, I find that
the delay is excusable.
41. An analogy may be drawn between this case, where
there was a unique situation arising from the hearing of a
Tribunal and civil proceedings, and the decisions in
Cosgrave v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] IESC 24
and Kennedy v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] IESC
34. While a Tribunal is not the administration of justice the
use of that model to investigate matters of public interest
may have an effect on legal decisions as to when to
advance court proceedings. While there are limitations on
a tribunal of inquiry, e.g. the findings are legally sterile,
the existence and working of a tribunal are facts which the
Court recognises and which may, as in this case, be
relevant to the process of litigation.
42. In the unique circumstances of this case, for the
reasons given, I am satisfied that the delay is excusable.
As I find the delay to be excusable, there are no grounds
to dismiss the proceedings.
43. As I am satisfied that the delay is excusable, it is not
necessary to proceed to the third aspect of the Primor
test, i.e. the test to determine, as a matter of discretion,
whether the balance of justice is in favour of or against
the proceedings continuing.

44. However, if it had been necessary to consider this


aspect of the test, I would have determined, as a matter of
discretion, on the facts, that the balance of justice is in
favour of the case proceeding. In such a determination I
would take into account (i) the fairness to both parties, in
all the circumstances, (ii) the absence of specific prejudice
to the State; (iii) the fact that the parties and witnesses
have over the years given statements and evidence
before the Tribunal, so that the situation is not one where
proceedings are commenced or continued long after
events where there has been no reference to the facts in
the meantime; (iv) the delay by the State during the
proceedings; (v) the conduct of the State, which was a de
facto acquiescence during 2002 to 2006; (vi) the fact that
the State stated in a letter of the 31st March, 2006, that a
motion to dismiss would be brought if the statement of
claim was not delivered within the time period specified
and consented to an extension of time for Persona to
deliver its statement of claim, and Persona complied with
the terms of the letter; (vii) in all the circumstances, there
is no risk to a fair trial or serious prejudice to the State;
(viii) these proceedings make serious allegations of
corruption by a Minister of the Government, not a matter
which should be struck out on a technicality but which
should be addressed in a full hearing in open court. In
submissions it was argued by the State that the
appellants actions were not in the public interest, but
were private commercial interests. However, this is not a
case between private companies, rather it involves
allegations of corruption by a Minister of State. There is a
public interest in determining such a claim of corruption in
high office. It is a matter of public interest as to whether a
Minister of Government corrupted a State process. This is
an important aspect of the case.
45. The parties, in essence, argued the appeal in the
Primor principles. It is not an appeal relating to delay in a
criminal trial and thus that jurisprudence is not of
assistance.
Interests of Justice
46. There was a free standing issue raised as to whether

the interests of justice enable the claim to be dismissed.


However, Primor pointed out that the courts have an
inherent jurisdiction to control their own procedure and to
dismiss a claim when the interests of justice require them
to do so. Thus, the foundation for this common law is the
interests of justice. Primor sets out a methodology. In
applying that methodology, in analysing the facts of a
case, the Court is required to consider all the
circumstances of the case. Consequently, applying the
principles described in Primor addresses the interests of
justice of the case.
Conclusion
47. On the unique facts of this case, for the reasons
given, I would allow the appeals.

THE SUPREME COURT


Appeals No. 216, 215 and 213
Denham C.J.
Hardiman J.
Fennelly J.
McKechnie J.
Clarke J.
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 9288P]

Between/
Comcast International Holdings Incorporated, Declan
Ganley, Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis OBrien, Ireland, and
the Attorney General

Defendants/Respondents
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 15119P]

Between/
Comcast International Holdings Incorporated, Declan
Ganley, Ganley International Limited and GCI Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Michael Lowry, Esat
Telecommunications Limited, Denis OBrien, Ireland, and
the Attorney General
Defendants/Respondents
[High Court Record No. 2001 No. 9223P]

Between/
Persona Digital Telephony Limited, and Sigma Wireless
Networks Limited
Plaintiffs/Appellants
and
Minister for Public Enterprise, Ireland and the Attorney
General
Defendants/Respondents
Reasons delivered on the 17th day of October, 2012 by
Denham C.J.
1.
These three appeals were heard together by this
appellate court, as they had been heard together by the
High Court.

2.
The appeals were heard on the 10th, 11th and 12th
July, 2012.
3.
On the 17th July, 2012, the Court indicated that it
would allow the appeals and that reasons would be given
in October.
4.
In this judgment I deliver the reasons why I would
allow the appeals.
5.
These proceedings were commenced consequent to
the decision of the Minister for Public Enterprise,
hereinafter referred to as the Minister, made on the 25th
October, 1995, to award the second GSM mobile
telephone licence, hereinafter referred to as the licence,
to ESAT Telecommunications Limited, hereinafter referred
to as ESAT. On the 2nd March, 1995, the Minister had
announced a bid process for the licence. The deadline for
receipt of tenders was extended on the 16th June, 1995,
from the 23rd June, 1995, to the 4th August, 1995, and the
result of the competition was announced on the 25th
October, 1995.
Three sets of proceedings
6.
The three sets of proceedings were commenced as
follows:(i) In the first set of proceedings the plaintiffs/appellants,
referred to as Comcast, issued a plenary summons on
the 15th June, 2001, which was served on the 14th June,
2002. The first set of proceedings relate primarily to the
decision of the Minister on the 16th June, 1995, to extend
the deadline of the 23rd June, 1995, for the receipt of
tenders for the award of the licence. The proceedings seek
a declaration that the decision is null and void, and there
is a claim for damages for alleged breach of statutory
duty, misfeasance in public office, breach of or procuring a
breach of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906, fraud,
deceit, breach of duty and breach of contract. The
defendants/respondents, excluding the State
defendants/respondents, are referred to as the
respondents. The State defendants/respondents, who are
referred to as the State, entered an appearance on the

20th June, 2002. A statement of claim was delivered on


the 3rd June, 2005.
6. (ii) In the second set of proceedings serious allegations
were made by Comcast; primarily the cause of action and
the remedies sought are in relation to the decision of the
25th October, 1995. The plenary summons was issued on
the 10th October, 2001 and served on the 4th October,
2002. An appearance was entered on behalf of the State
on the 16th December, 2002. A statement of claim was
served on the 3rd June, 2005.
6. (iii) In the third set of proceedings a plenary summons
was issued by the plaintiffs/appellants, hereinafter referred
to as Persona, on the 15th June, 2001, which was served
on the 10th June, 2002. The summons claimed damages
(including exemplary damages) for misfeasance in public
office, breach of duty, including statutory duty, breach of
contract, breach of legitimate expectations of Persona,
breach of constitutional rights of Persona, breach of rights
under EU law, and a declaration that the European
Communities (Mobiles and Personal Communications)
Regulations 1996, hereinafter referred to as the
Regulations of 1996, contravene EU law. An appearance
was entered on behalf of the State on the 20th June, 2002.
The statement of claim was delivered on the 21st April,
2006.
Motions
7.
The State brought motions, dated the 26th May,
2006, and filed on the 29th May, 2006, giving notice that
on the 26th June, 2006 at 11.00 a.m., or at the first
available opportunity thereafter, counsel for the Minister,
Ireland and the Attorney General would apply for the
following reliefs:(i)
An order, pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the
court, dismissing the proceedings as against the Minister,
Ireland and the Attorney General, for delay and/or want of
prosecution.
(ii) An order, pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the
court, dismissing the proceedings as against the Minister,
Ireland, and the Attorney General, in the interests of

justice.
(iii) Such further and ancillary orders as the court may
deem proper and appropriate
8.
The motions were heard by the High Court (Gilligan
J.) on the 8th and 9th February, 2007, and judgment was
delivered on the 13th June, 2007. On the 3rd July, 2007,
the High Court through its orders dismissed for inordinate
and inexcusable delay Personas action and both actions
taken by Comcast. The orders were perfected on the 9th
July, 2007.
The High Court Judgment
9. (i) In the High Court, the learned High Court judge found
that there was no significance material difference between
the applications brought by the State and the grounds of
defence raised by Comcast and Persona, referred to as
the appellants, and as a consequence all three motions
were heard together. The High Court decided to deliver
one judgment in respect of the three motions on the three
sets of proceedings.
9. (ii) The learned High Court judge held that there was no
dispute between the parties that the delay was inordinate.
So, the first issue that arose for determination in the High
Court was whether or not the delay was inexcusable. The
learned High Court judge held:My overall conclusion is that I do not consider that the
excuses offered by [the appellants] and, in particular, that
they were monitoring the hearings of the Moriarty Tribunal
into the award of the second GSM mobile telephone
licence and, hence, did not deliver a statement of claim,
an explanation that constitutes a valid excuse and,
accordingly, I come to the conclusion that the delay
involved in the prosecution of all three claims herein is not
only inordinate but also inexcusable. The delay, in my
view, goes beyond the minimum which may be considered
inordinate.
9. (iii) As the High Court had come to the conclusion that
the delay was inordinate and inexcusable, that Court
moved on to consider whether the balance of justice

favoured the advancement, or not, of the proceedings.


The High Court pointed out that no case was made by the
State of any specific prejudice having occurred by reason
of the inordinate and unreasonable delay. The learned
High Court judge stated that the appellants and the State
had contributed to the delay involved. He also stated:In the particular circumstances of this case all the parties
who are involved in these three sets of proceedings were
parties with an interest in the matters being dealt with at
the Moriarty Tribunal. The relevant parties to these
proceedings were present on every hearing date relating
to any matters touching on the subject matter of these
proceedings.
9. (iv) The High Court stated that the State would suffer a
presumed prejudice if the appellants were permitted to
proceed with their actions, and assessed the prejudice as
moderate. Having analysed the situation further he
stated:I come to the conclusion that where responsibility for
inordinate and inexcusable delay rests primarily with the
[appellants], where there is presumed prejudice of a
moderate nature, where the issues to be determined are
of a very substantial commercial nature, where the actions
leading to the delay involved are deliberate and conscious,
where the prospects of a fair trial have been undermined,
where the [appellants] have failed after a late start to
advance their proceedings expeditiously, the balance of
justice favours the dismissal of the proceedings and,
accordingly, I dismiss the [appellants] proceedings as
against the [State] for want of prosecution.
9. (v) The High Court also addressed the application
brought pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the Court
to dismiss the appellants claim in the interests of justice,
where reliance was placed on Article 6 of the European
Convention on Human Rights. Reference was made to
ODomhnaill v. Merrick [1984] I.R. 151; Toal v. Duignan
(No. 1) [1991] ILRM 135; Toal v. Duignan (No. 2) [1991]
ILRM 140, especially at pp. 142 143; and McMullen v.
Ireland (ECtHR application No. 42297/98, 29th July, 2004.)
The learned High Court judge held:In my view, for this Court to be asked in 2009 to
determine primarily issues of fact that will have occurred

at the time of the prospective hearing date some 14 years


previously, gives rise to a basic unfairness of procedures,
undermines the [States] ability to have a fair trial, creates
a clear and patent unfairness in asking the [State] to
defend the action, and clearly fails to provide the [State]
with a hearing within a reasonable time of the alleged
cause of action having occurred. In essence, in my view, in
a case such as this, it puts justice to the hazard to such
an extent that it would be a derogation (sic) of basic
fairness to allow the case to proceed to trial as per
Henchy J. in ODomhnaill at p. 158. In these
circumstances, I come to the conclusion pursuant to the
inherent jurisdiction of the court to dismiss the
[appellants] claim as against the [State].
Notice of Appeal
10. Comcast issued a notice of appeal on the 27th July,
2007. Inter alia, the grounds of appeal were that the
learned trial judge erred in fact and in law in considering
that the appellants delay was inexcusable; that the
learned trial judge erred in law and in fact in considering
that the balance of justice was against allowing the case
to proceed; and that the learned trial judge erred in
considering that the appellants proceedings should be
struck out in the interests of justice. Persona issued a
notice of appeal on the 25th July, 2007. Inter alia, its
grounds of appeal were that the learned trial judge erred
in law and fact in determining that delay was inexcusable;
that the balance of justice favoured the dismissal of the
proceedings; and that the State wrote to Persona stating
that if a statement of claim was not delivered within 21
days then a motion for dismissal of proceedings would
issue and consented to the late filing of the statement of
claim if it was delivered within 21 days
Issue Paper
11. An issue paper was produced by the State and was
before the Court. It set out issues for the Court as follows:11. (i) Is this delay in these cases excusable (the
appellants having already conceded the delay was
inordinate) by reason of the following:-

(i) the decision of the appellants to adopt a wait and see


policy in respect of the hearings of the Moriarty Tribunal,
the Tribunal, having regard to the specific allegations
made by the appellants in their pleadings when the cases
were initiated;
(ii) the appellants contention that if the appellants had
attempted to bring on the proceedings during the Tribunal
hearings the State would have resisted this course;
(iii) Personas assertion that the State did not believe the
proceedings were dormant having regard to (a) a
statement by the former solicitor for Persona to a solicitor
from the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, in response to a
query by the latter, that no statement of claim would be
delivered in the proceedings for the foreseeable future
as Persona were following the Tribunal, and (b) the
delivery of a 21 day letter by the Office of the Chief State
Solicitor to Persona seeking delivery of a statement of
claim within 21 days under threat of a motion to strike out
in default;
(iv) the nature and extent of the States own
inaction/delay;
(v) the nature of and the issues in the proceedings;
(vi) the time that has elapsed since the events giving rise
to these proceedings.
11. (ii) Was the trial judge correct in law in holding that the
balance of the interests of justice required the appellants
claims to be dismissed, having regard to:
(i) the overall delay in the proceedings and the relative
contributions of the appellants and the State respectively
to same;
(ii) the deliberate and conscious nature of the decision of
the appellants to wait and see;
(iii) the holding of the existence of prejudice of a modest
nature to the State;
(iv) the likely nature and extent of the issues and evidence

at the trial;
(v) the finding that to ask the State to defend the
proceedings would be unfair and undermine their ability to
have a fair trial;
(vi) the effect of the provisions of Article 6 of the
European Convention on Human Rights;
(vii) the exercise by the learned trial judge of his discretion
having regard to the matters referred to in his judgment
as set out above.
Law
12. In all the circumstances, the primary relevant law is
that stated in Primor Plc v. Stokes Kennedy Crowley [1996]
2 I.R. 495, hereinafter referred to as Primor, where the
issue was whether proceedings should be dismissed for
want of prosecution. In delivering a judgment, Hamilton
C.J., at p. 475, summarised the relevant principles of law
as follows:(a) the courts have an inherent jurisdiction to control
their own procedure and to dismiss a claim when the
interests of justice require them to do so;
(b) it must, in the first instance, be established by the
party seeking a dismissal of proceedings for want of
prosecution on the ground of delay in the prosecution
thereof, that the delay, was inordinate and inexcusable;
(c) even where the delay has been both inordinate and
inexcusable the court must exercise a judgment on
whether, in its discretion, on the facts the balance of
justice is in favour of or against the proceeding of the
case;
(d) in considering this latter obligation the court is entitled
to take into consideration and have regard to
(i) the implied constitutional principles of basic fairness of
procedures,
(ii) whether the delay and consequent prejudice in the

special facts of the case are such as to make it unfair to


the defendant to allow the action to proceed and to make
it just to strike out the plaintiff's action,
(iii) any delay on the part of the defendant - because
litigation is a two party operation, the conduct of both
parties should be looked at,
(iv) whether any delay or conduct of the defendant
amounts to acquiescence on the part of the defendant in
the plaintiff's delay,
(v) the fact that conduct by the defendant which induces
the plaintiff to incur further expense in pursuing the action
does not, in law, constitute an absolute bar preventing the
defendant from obtaining a striking out order but is a
relevant factor to be taken into account by the judge in
exercising his discretion whether or not to strike out the
claim, the weight to be attached to such conduct
depending upon all the circumstances of the particular
case,
(vi) whether the delay gives rise to a substantial risk that
it is not possible to have a fair trial or is likely to cause or
have caused serious prejudice to the defendant,
(vii) the fact that the prejudice to the defendant referred
to in (vi) may arise in many ways and be other than that
merely caused by the delay, including damage to a
defendant's reputation and business.
These are the principles of law relevant to the appeals
before the Court. This is not an appeal relating to a
criminal trial, and thus the law as to delay and a criminal
trial does not apply.
13. The nature of an inordinate and inexcusable delay
requires to be considered in all the circumstances of the
case. Thus, the factors of each case require to be
analysed.
In addition, in recent times there has been an
acknowledgement that cases may not be let lie, in a

laissez faire attitude, for the parties to move. There is a


requirement to ensure that cases are progressed
reasonably. This approach has been the subject of
litigation in Ireland and has also been addressed by the
European Court on Human Rights. For example, in Price
and Lowe v. The United Kingdom 43185/98, there was an
application alleging a violation of Article 6 of the
Convention in connection with the length of the
proceedings at issue. Article 6 provides:
"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ...,
everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable
time..."
The ECtHR reiterated that the reasonableness of the
length of the proceedings must be addressed in the light
of the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the
criteria laid down in the Court's case law, in particular:

The complexity of the case,

The conduct of the applicant,

The conduct of the relevant authorities, and

The importance of what is at stake for the applicant


in the litigation.
The Court held that the manner in which a State provides
for mechanisms to comply with this requirement - whether
by way of increasing the number of judges, or by
automatic time-limits and directions, or by some other
method - is for the State to decide. In this case the
domestic law is that stated in Primor, where the factors
identified by Hamilton C.J., as set out previously, are not
dissimilar to the criteria set out in Price.
Decision
14. As indicated on the 17th July, 2012, I would allow the
appeals. Consequently the proceedings may continue in
the High Court, for the following reasons.
Reasons
Issues

15. On behalf of the appellants it was submitted that


there were three issues to be determined:(i)
Is the delay an excusable delay? (It was accepted
that it was an inordinate delay).
(ii) If it was not excusable does the balance of justice
mean it should be struck out?
(iii) There was a free standing issue as to whether the
interests of justice enable the claim to be dismissed.
I shall follow this sequence in giving my reasons.
In essence, as it was accepted that there was inordinate
delay by the appellants, at issue was whether the delay by
the appellants was excusable in all the circumstances of
the case.
Facts
16. The dates as to the proceedings in these appeals are
not in issue, as they are not contested. The dates when
the proceedings were issued, were delivered, and the
various steps taken, are not disputed and have been set
out earlier in this judgment.
Primor inordinate delay
17. The relevant law is as described above by Hamilton
C.J. in Primor.
18. Thus, the first issue is whether there has been
inordinate delay by the appellants in moving the
proceedings. The relevant time period to consider whether
or not there was inordinate delay was from the
commencement of the proceedings until the delivery of
the statement of claim. Both Comcast and Persona
accepted that there was inordinate delay. Thus, the first
aspect of the test under Primor was met.
Primor inexcusable delay
19. The second issue to address is whether the delay was
excusable.
Claim of corruption
20. In considering this case the serious and important
nature of the matters of corruption claimed by the
appellants is a relevant factor.
21. Thus, for example, the plenary summons issued by

Comcast, on the 10th October, 2001, claims that the


decision to award the licence to Esat is unlawful and void,
and damages are sought on a number of alleged bases,
including misfeasance in public office, fraud, and deceit.
22. In the statement of claim, delivered on the 3rd June,
2005, Comcast claims:Wrongfully, and in breach of contract, breach of duty and
breach of statutory duty, the Minister interfered with the
integrity of the tender process. He abused his public office
by intervening in the tender process to ensure that the
licence be awarded to Esat. He accepted payments made
by or on behalf of Esat and/or Denis OBrien to ensure the
award of the licence to Esat and/or to reward the Minister
for having intervened to ensure the awarding of the
licence to Esat. In doing so, he breached the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1906. In representing the tender process
and the award of the licence to Esat as having been the
result of a fair and honest tender process, he engaged in
fraud and deceit and abused his office.
23. In both of the statements of claim, in each of the
proceedings, Comcast stated explicitly that it was unable
to give full particulars of the wrongdoing of the Minister,
pending the conclusion of the investigations the subject of
inquiry by the Tribunal.
24. However, on the basis of the information disclosed at
the public hearings of the Tribunal to that date, Comcast
stated that it is clear that the Minister engaged in the
following forms of wrongdoing:(a) The Minister compromised the integrity of the tender
process by breaching the guidelines for communications
with bidders:
i. On August 16th 1995, while the bids were being
evaluated, the Minister met with the chairman of one of
the bidders, the Persona Consortium, and discussed that
consortium's bid;
ii. On September 15th 1995, the Minister met with Mr Tony
O'Reilly, a representative of another bidder, the AT&T
consortium, and made reference to that consortium's bid;

iii. In September 1995, the Minister met with Denis O'Brien


and suggested that IIU Nominees Limited ("IIU") should
become involved in the Esat consortium.
(b) The Minister, his servants or agents disclosed or
caused to be disclosed confidential information in relation
to the bid process to Esat;
i. Esat was informed of the fact that the competition
structure was to be changed from a "straight auction" to
"beauty contest" and of the extension of the bidding
process prior to any such information being -disclosed to
the other bidders;
ii. The Minister, his servants or agents, informed Esat of
the contents of discussions with the European Commission
in relation to the imposition of a cap on the licence fee.
Access to this information placed Esat at a significant
competitive advantage;
iii. The Minister, his servants or agents disclosed or caused
to be disclosed certain of the weightings to be applied to
the evaluation of bids.
(c) The Minister modified the terms of and unlawfully
interfered with the tender process to favour Esat.
i. The Minister, his servants or agents intervened to ensure
the imposition of the cap of 15m on the licence fee;
ii. The Minister amended the timing of key milestones in
the tender process, including the final date by which
tender bids were to be lodged. The original closing date
for receipt of submissions of tenders was June 23rd 1995.
This date was extended to August 4th 1995. The purpose
and effect of the extension of this deadline was to favour
Esat;
iii. The evaluation methodology was modified with the aim
and effect of favouring Esat.
iv. The Minister intervened in the substantive evaluation
process to ensure that the choice of successful bid was
determined other than by reference to the
recommendation of the project group;

v. The Minister failed to conduct any or any appropriate


assessment to satisfy himself as to the financial and/or
technical capacity of Esat prior to the award of the licence;
vi. Notwithstanding the Minister's knowledge that the Esat
bid lacked reasonable financial capability, the Minister
nonetheless awarded the licence to Esat;
vii. The Minister expedited the selection and
announcement of the successful bid and, in so doing,
failed to have any or any adequate regard to the final
evaluation report prepared by the external consultants
("AMI") appointed to advise on the evaluation of bids,
which report did not identify a definitive winner. The
Minister made a public announcement on October 25th
1995 to the effect that the competition was won by Esat
prior to the presentation of the final evaluation report to
the Department, and prior to the consideration of that
report by the project group;
viii. The Minister unlawfully procured or facilitated the
entry of IIU into the Esat consortium after the submission
by Esat of its bid on August 4th 1995. In so permitting a
post-submission amendment to the bid, he breached the
rules of the tender process;
ix. The Minister was aware of the involvement of IIU in the
bid prior to the award of the licence to Esat. Nonetheless,
he failed to take any steps to assess the financial capacity
of the Esat consortium to the detriment of the other
bidders. No assessment of the financial standing of IIU was
conducted by the Minister, his servants or agents, until
May 1996, prior to the signing of the licence agreement by
the Minister;
x. The Minister abused his position prior to the award of
licence to Esat by intervening with the Electricity Supply
Board ("ESB") to ensure that Esat would be permitted to
erect masts on ESB pylons;
(d) The Minister accepted improper payments made by

Denis O'Brien and/or Esat which payments were made to


influence the outcome of the tender process and/or to
reward the Minister for having intervened to ensure the
awarding of the licence to Esat.
i. Subsequent to the announcement of the decision to
award the licence to Esat, the sum of US$50,000 was paid,
in December 1995, by Esat to an offshore account
operated by David Austin, a senior Fine Gael fundraiser.
The sum of 50,000 was paid by David Austin to Fine Gael
on May 6th 1997. The said sum was repaid on March 2nd
1998. Fine Gael indicated that it could not accept the
payment of the sum which Mr O'Brien claimed to have
been a donation from Esat. [Comcast] contend that the
payment of US$50,000 was intended by Denis O'Brien to
influence the outcome of the tender process and/or to
ensure that Esat was awarded the licence and/or to reward
the Minister for having intervened to ensure the awarding
of the licence to Esat;
ii. The Minister accepted the sum of 100,000 paid by
Denis O'Brien in early/mid-1996. The aim and effect of this
payment was to influence the outcome of the tender
process and/or to reward the Minister for having
intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to Esat;
iii. In July 1996, Denis O'Brien arranged for the payment of
150,000 to David Austin, who transferred the sum of
147,000 to the Minister. The aim and effect of the
transfer of funds from Denis O'Brien to David Austin and
subsequently to the Minister was to influence the outcome
of the tender process and/or to reward the Minister for
having intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to
Esat;
iv. Denis O'Brien financed the purchase of a property in
Mansfield, England acquired by the Minister. The aim and
effect of the provision of finance for the acquisition of the
Mansfield property was to influence the outcome of the
tender process and/or to reward the Minister for having
intervened to ensure the awarding of the licence to Esat.
And [Comcast] reserve[d] the right to deliver further
particulars hereof at any time before the trial of this

action.
25. In the statement of claim delivered by Persona, on
the 21st April, 2006, it was claimed, inter alia, that about
the 2nd March, 1995, a conspiracy was hatched whereby
the Minister for Public Enterprise, its servants or agents,
and/or the Minister, conspired with another, namely Esat,
its servants or agents, to promote an inevitable
competition result. In the furtherance of the conspiracy
the parties infiltrated or penetrated the competition and/or
in the alternative ignored or disregarded the competition
process and/or in the alternative utilised the process for
the purpose of concealment and thereby ensuring the
granting of the licence to Esat. Also, it is claimed that on
dates unknown the Minister, its servants or agents, acting
in purported exercise of their powers and functions and
purportedly acting in the best interests of the public, but
the Minister acted unlawfully and maliciously and
committed an act or acts, or knowingly acted ultra vires or
acted with reckless indifference and as such, they
deliberately or dishonestly abused the power conferred,
abused authority, abused trust with the known
consequences that it would cause injury and damage to
Persona. There is a claim for special damages. There is
also a claim for aggravated, punitive and exemplary
damages on the basis, inter alia, of the seriousness of the
corrupt practices engaged in; the fact that the corrupt
practices were at the highest level, i.e. they involved the
Minister; the fact that the Minister abused his office and
his authority and breached trust; the fact that the Minister
used his office for a personal self serving purpose; the fact
that the corrupt practices were not merely opportunistic
but were carefully planned and designed; the fact that the
Minister wantonly and unlawfully utilised his position of
trust in disregard of the public interest.
Affidavits
26. The reasons for the delay by Comcast and Persona
were stated on affidavit by Damien Young and William
Jolley, respectively.
27. Damien Young deposed that at the time of issuing the
proceedings, Comcast believed that the award of the
licence was wrongful. He stated that the subject matter of

these proceedings was also the subject matter of the


Tribunal and that it had been anticipated that the Tribunal
would have completed its work in relation to the licence
module within a one year following the issuing of the
plenary summons, i.e. by June 2002. He deposed:
Unfortunately, this was not the case. When Damien
Young deposed his affidavit on the 23rd June, 2006, the
licence module of the Tribunal had not yet been
completed. The module had been going on for years, and
was suspended for a time pending an appeal to this Court.
28. Damien Young explained:At the time of the issuing of the proceedings, [Comcast]
believed that the award of the second GSM licence to
[Esat], was wrongful. However, [Comcast] were not in a
position to know the detail of the manner, nature and
extent of the breaches of the tender process. They hoped
that this detail would be clarified by the Moriarty Tribunal,
permitting the delivery by [Comcast] of a particularised
Statement of Claim.
29. Damien Young deposed that while he accepted that
there had been delay, he deposed that it was excusable as
the subject matter of the proceedings was also the subject
matter of continued investigation by the Tribunal. He
stated that the complexity of the subject matter of these
proceedings is evident from the time taken by the Tribunal
in investigating the matter. He stated that Comcast cannot
be expected to be aware of all the details of the improper
payments and conduct which Comcast believe resulted in
the award of the licence to Esat. He deposed that it was
reasonable for Comcast to await the information provided
in the public hearings of the Tribunal prior to the delivery
of the Statement of Claim. He also deposed that there was
no particular prejudice suffered by the State.
30. In his affidavit William Jolley deposed, inter alia, that
the interference by the Minister was a complete abuse by
the Minister of his office. In 1996 Persona had made a
complaint to the European Union in relation to the manner
in which the competition for the grant of the licence was
conducted, but was told that the matter was essentially
one for the Irish courts. He deposed that in May, 2001, the

Tribunal indicated that it was commencing investigations


into the circumstances in which the Minister, Michael
Lowry, granted the licence to Esat. He stated that this
announcement by the Tribunal confirmed the concerns of
Persona into the grant of the licence and a decision was
made to issue the within proceedings.
31. He deposed:9. The Moriarty Tribunal went into public session in
relation to the circumstances surrounding the grant of the
said licence in December, 2002. The [Minister] has been
represented at the public hearings by Mr. Shaw (on behalf
of the Chief State Solicitor's Office). [Personas] former
solicitors, and in particular Mr. Gerald Moloney and John
O'Donovan, have attended more or less every public
sitting of the Tribunal since 2001. Mr. Moloney has
informed me that on a number of occasions casual
conversations have taken place between him and Mr.
Shaw.
In particular, I am informed by Mr. Moloney that
not long after the service of the proceedings Mr. Moloney
met Mr. Shaw at the Tribunal and was asked by Mr. Shaw if
he was going to deliver a Statement of Claim. Mr. Moloney
told Mr. Shaw that he would not be delivering it for the
foreseeable future for the very reason that the [Persona]
(and their representatives) would firstly be following the
evidence which was likely to unfold at the Tribunal. Mr.
Moloney informs me that at no stage did Mr. Shaw object
to this proposed course of action and indeed if anything
appeared to be relieved as his Clients had more than
enough to do in dealing with the Tribunal.
10. Having regard to the constant attendance by the
[Personas] legal representatives at the Tribunal and the
aforementioned conversations, the [State] are well aware
of [Personas} intention to prosecute these proceedings.
During the course of the Tribunal hearings Tony Boyle, a
director of [Persona], has given evidence and has been
subjected to cross examination by Counsel on behalf of
the [Minister]. During the course of that cross examination
Counsel for the [Minister] has referred to the existence of
the proceedings and while suggesting that the Tribunal is

being used as "a kind of stalking horse" for the


proceedings (which Mr. Boyle did not accept) never made
any complaint about any alleged delay or prejudice being
suffered by the Minister or any of the other State
Defendants.
11. The within proceedings are serious and complex and
involve the assimilation of a large volume of information
and evidence. Certain information and avenues of inquiry
have been identified during the course of the public
sittings which have assisted [Persona] in the preparation
of their case and the assimilation of evidence outside of
the Tribunal. The prosecution of the case is not, however,
dependent upon any particular finding by the Moriarty
Tribunal and it is [Personas] intention to proceed with
these proceedings irrespective of what conclusion the
Moriarty Tribunal may come to.
12. Representatives of the [State] have given evidence to
the Moriarty Tribunal as to their involvement in the licence
competition. That module of the Moriarty Tribunal has not
been completed yet as far as I am aware no complaint has
ever been made by or on behalf of the [State] or the
officials of the Department of any prejudice due to the
remove in time between the Tribunal hearings and the
events under investigation dating back to 1995.
Furthermore, it is apparent from the public hearings of the
Tribunal that considerable documentation is available to
assist the various Department officials in their recollection
of events where such is necessary.
13. The timing of the issue of the current motion is of
significance. As appears from exhibit "MS1" to Mr. Shaw's
Affidavit no complaint was made between 2002 and 2006
in respect of [Personas] failure to deliver a Statement of
Claim. On the 23rd March, 2006 I served on the Chief
State Solicitor's Office a Notice of Change of Solicitor.
Within a week of receipt of that letter Mr. Shaw wrote to
me seeking the delivery of a Statement of Claim and
consenting to its delivery within 21 days. Nowhere in that
letter does Mr. Shaw complain of any prejudice; on the
contrary, he invites [Persona] to proceed with their claim

and it is difficult to understand what has occurred between


that date (31st March, 2006) and 26th May, 2006 to bring
about such a fundamental change in approach. [Persona]
believe[s], and I concur, that the request for the delivery
of a Statement of Claim made immediately after the
service of a Notice of Change of Solicitor was done so to
"catch the plaintiffs on the hop. I had in fact sought a
short extension of the 21 day period on 5th , 11th and
21st April, 2006 but never received any response to that
request. I beg to refer to copies of the three letters upon
which marked with the letter "WJ" I have endorsed my
name prior to the swearing hereof. Furthermore, I also
rang the Office of the Chief State Solicitor on a number of
occasions and left messages but my calls were largely
ignored and disregarded. In fact, the Statement of Claim
was delivered within the 21 day period allowed in the
letter of 31st March, 2006.
Application to strike out proceedings
32. As may be seen from the affidavit of William Jolley,
quoted previously, the position of Persona was also that
they were following the evidence likely to unfold at the
Tribunal. Further, that the State were aware of this
approach.
33. On Monday the 9th May, 2005, the High Court (Kelly
J.) ordered in both of the proceedings by Comcast that
unless Comcast do within 28 days from the 9th May, 2005,
deliver a statement of claim to the fourth named
defendant, Mr. Denis OBrien, that Comcasts claims would
stand dismissed for want of prosecution as against the
fourth named defendant for failure to deliver a statement
of claim within the time prescribed by the Rules of the
Superior Court.
34. The statements of claim in both Comcast proceedings
were delivered on the 3rd June, 2005, i.e. within the time
required by the order of the High Court.
35. Thus, Comcast had met the requirements of the High
Court order.
36. On the 28th July, 2005, the solicitors for the fourth

named defendant sought further particulars in the


Comcast proceedings. The replies to notice for particulars
are dated the 12th January, 2006. On the 7th March, 2006,
a notice of change of solicitor on behalf of the fourth
named defendant was filed. On the 15th May, 2006, a
defence and counterclaim on behalf of the fourth named
defendant was served. On the 14th November, 2006, a
defence to the counterclaim was delivered on behalf of
Comcast, and notice of particulars sought on behalf of
Comcast on the counterclaim.
37. It was in the midst of these circumstances that, on
the 26th May, 2006, the State issued the motion, the
subject of this appeal, to dismiss the proceedings against
the State.
Decision on excusability
38. It is clear from the evidence before the High Court
and this Court that the primary reason for the delay in the
proceedings was the decision taken by Comcast and
Persona to await the completion of the investigative
section of the Tribunal into the granting of the licence.
39. Usually a deliberate decision by a party to delay
proceedings is not excusable, but this case is unique for a
number of reasons. These reasons include the following:
(i) The facts which form the foundation for the claim were
being investigated by a Tribunal of Inquiry at the same
time as the proceedings were contemplated and then
commenced.
(ii) The nature of the facts alleged are very serious and
rare, i.e. a claim of corruption of a Minister of the
Government.
(iii) In addition, the facts in such proceedings are of their
nature very difficult to expose and particularize.
(iv) Also, the case is complex.
(v) Counsel for Comcast put the matter starkly, stating
that the excuse for the delay was that the appellants were

not in a position to prosecute the claim in any wholly


informed way until they were educated by the
investigative hearings of the Tribunal.
(vi) It is relevant also that during the time in issue the
State took no active step to advance the court
proceedings. On the facts, the State took no steps to
advance the proceedings from the serving of the three
plenary summonses in 2002 to April, 2006, when the State
gave consent to the late filing, within a specific time, of
Personas statement of claim in April, 2006, which was
delivered within that time on the 21st April, 2006.
However, the State, in May, 2006, issued motions to
dismiss for want of prosecution each of Personas and
Comcasts proceedings, which became the subject of this
appeal.
In contrast to the States inaction, a natural person, Mr
Denis OBrien, who is the fourth named defendant in the
Comcast proceedings, in late 2004, sought to dismiss for
want of prosecution Comcasts claims against him by
application to the Master of the High Court, which was
refused, and then by application to the High Court, which
was also refused if Comcast delivered its statement of
claim to Mr OBrien within 28 days of the order of the High
Court, which was made on the 9th May, 2005. Comcast
delivered the statement of claim to Mr OBrien within the
time limit set by the order and delivered the statement of
claim to the State on the 3rd June, 2005. Mr OBrien then
sought particulars from Comcast, which were provided by
Comcast in January, 2006, and Mr OBrien delivered a
defence and counterclaim in May, 2006, to which Comcast
responded to in November, 2006.
Thus, the High Court addressed the issue of delay in 2005
and required the statement of claim to be delivered rather
than dismiss the proceedings; the sequence of events that
followed demonstrated the engagement by Comcast with
a party who sought to advance the progression of the
proceedings in 2005 and 2006 and provides context to
view the States response to the appellants proceedings.
In all the unique circumstances of this case, there was, at

the very least, a de facto acquiescence in the delay in the


proceedings on the States behalf.
(vii) The inaction of the State between 2002 to 2006 in
these proceedings even continued after the statements of
claim of Comcast were delivered, when they failed to react
to the delivery of the first two statements of claim in 2005.
The State did not proceed to seek particulars such as
would be expected in a complex case.
(viii) During those years, 2002 to 2006, all the parties, to
one degree or another, were engaged in and monitoring
the investigations of the Tribunal into the granting of the
licence.
(ix) An unusual feature of the case is that, as a
consequence of the Tribunal inquiries, witnesses have
made statements and given oral evidence relevant to the
granting of the licence. Consequently, evidence has been
gathered because of the investigative hearings of the
Tribunal. Thus, while the appellants would need to present
their evidence in proceedings before the courts, this is not
a case where, years after an event, with no intervening
warning, defendants are required to defend a claim.
(x) The State was on notice of the appellants approach,
i.e. of the appellants decision to wait until the
investigative section of the Tribunal into the granting of
the licence had progressed, before serving the statements
of claim. This notice may have been express, in
accordance with the evidence deposed by William Jolley,
as set out above, of conversations between Mr. Moloney
and Mr. Shaw. It was not contradicted. Or the position may
have been implied. Whichever way the situation is
considered the facts are that the State was participating in
the Tribunal, had been served with the plenary
summonses in these proceedings, and yet took no step to
seek to advance these proceedings during these years.
Indeed, the State did not object until the 29th May, 2006,
when it filed its motions to dismiss for delay and/or want
of prosecution. I take this, at the very least, as a de facto
acquiescence in the delay in the proceedings pending the

conclusion of the investigative sessions of the Tribunal, in


all the unique circumstances of the case.
(xi) Persona relied on the letter of the 31st March, 2006,
as indicating the States position. The letter stated:Please note that if you do not file a statement of claim on
behalf of your clients within 21 days from the date hereof,
I am instructed to proceed with a notice of motion, seeking
to strike out these proceedings for want of prosecution,
without further notice to you.
You might further note that on behalf of the [State], I
hereby consent to the late filing of the statement of claim
by you up to and including 21 days from date hereof.
Persona responded by delivering their statement of claim
within 21 days. Personas reliance on the terms of the
letter including the consent to the late filing of the
statement of claim, was a reasonable position.
(xii) In the special circumstances, because of the nature of
the claim of corruption, where it is alleged that the wrongs
in this case were concealed, and covert, this approach by
the appellants, and indeed by the State, is
understandable. The Tribunal was investigating the wrongs
claimed by the appellants, it had the resources, and could
compel witnesses to advance its investigation into the
circumstances of the licence.
(xiii) Of course, the findings of the Tribunal are, under
current law, not admissible in the civil proceedings, and
the appellants do not seek to admit such findings.
However, the investigations of the Tribunal have exposed
information, facts, documents, and witnesses of assistance
to the appellants. The appellants awaited the completion
of the investigative stages of the Tribunal they did not
await the Report.
(xiv) No actual prejudice was found to attach to the State.
The learned High Court judge held that:While no actual prejudice has been referred to, I am
satisfied that there is presumed prejudice on a moderate

level.
However, there was no claim of specific prejudice to the
State, such as the death of a witness. References as to
prejudice were general, such as in the grounding affidavit
of Mr. Shaw where he states at paragraph 13 [w]hile the
statement of claim was delivered, I say the plaintiffs delay
has been inordinate and inexcusable and therefore
prejudicial []. The submissions to this Court have a
section on prejudice, where issues such as reputational
damage and the difficulty of meeting the award of
damages, inter alia, are considered. In fact, in the absence
of an evidential foundation for a finding of specific
prejudice, e.g. no absence of witnesses alleged, no
concrete difficulty alleged, any analysis of the issue of
prejudice would be a matter of speculation.
40. In general, it is not open to a party to decide
unilaterally not to proceed with proceedings in a case for a
particular time and reasons. However, in the interest of
fair and just proceedings, there are exceptions. This is one
such exception, where in the interests of justice, I find that
the delay is excusable.
41. An analogy may be drawn between this case, where
there was a unique situation arising from the hearing of a
Tribunal and civil proceedings, and the decisions in
Cosgrave v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] IESC 24
and Kennedy v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2012] IESC
34. While a Tribunal is not the administration of justice the
use of that model to investigate matters of public interest
may have an effect on legal decisions as to when to
advance court proceedings. While there are limitations on
a tribunal of inquiry, e.g. the findings are legally sterile,
the existence and working of a tribunal are facts which the
Court recognises and which may, as in this case, be
relevant to the process of litigation.
42. In the unique circumstances of this case, for the
reasons given, I am satisfied that the delay is excusable.
As I find the delay to be excusable, there are no grounds
to dismiss the proceedings.
43. As I am satisfied that the delay is excusable, it is not

necessary to proceed to the third aspect of the Primor


test, i.e. the test to determine, as a matter of discretion,
whether the balance of justice is in favour of or against
the proceedings continuing.
44. However, if it had been necessary to consider this
aspect of the test, I would have determined, as a matter of
discretion, on the facts, that the balance of justice is in
favour of the case proceeding. In such a determination I
would take into account (i) the fairness to both parties, in
all the circumstances, (ii) the absence of specific prejudice
to the State; (iii) the fact that the parties and witnesses
have over the years given statements and evidence
before the Tribunal, so that the situation is not one where
proceedings are commenced or continued long after
events where there has been no reference to the facts in
the meantime; (iv) the delay by the State during the
proceedings; (v) the conduct of the State, which was a de
facto acquiescence during 2002 to 2006; (vi) the fact that
the State stated in a letter of the 31st March, 2006, that a
motion to dismiss would be brought if the statement of
claim was not delivered within the time period specified
and consented to an extension of time for Persona to
deliver its statement of claim, and Persona complied with
the terms of the letter; (vii) in all the circumstances, there
is no risk to a fair trial or serious prejudice to the State;
(viii) these proceedings make serious allegations of
corruption by a Minister of the Government, not a matter
which should be struck out on a technicality but which
should be addressed in a full hearing in open court. In
submissions it was argued by the State that the
appellants actions were not in the public interest, but
were private commercial interests. However, this is not a
case between private companies, rather it involves
allegations of corruption by a Minister of State. There is a
public interest in determining such a claim of corruption in
high office. It is a matter of public interest as to whether a
Minister of Government corrupted a State process. This is
an important aspect of the case.
45. The parties, in essence, argued the appeal in the
Primor principles. It is not an appeal relating to delay in a

criminal trial and thus that jurisprudence is not of


assistance.
Interests of Justice
46. There was a free standing issue raised as to whether
the interests of justice enable the claim to be dismissed.
However, Primor pointed out that the courts have an
inherent jurisdiction to control their own procedure and to
dismiss a claim when the interests of justice require them
to do so. Thus, the foundation for this common law is the
interests of justice. Primor sets out a methodology. In
applying that methodology, in analysing the facts of a
case, the Court is required to consider all the
circumstances of the case. Consequently, applying the
principles described in Primor addresses the interests of
justice of the case.
Conclusion
47. On the unique facts of this case, for the reasons
given, I would allow the appeals.
http://www.supremecourt.ie/Judgments.nsf/1b0757edc371032e8025
72ea0061450e/4609ec7f85f89a8980257a9a0050ebf4?
OpenDocument

Former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern is a psychopath.

The Mahon Tribunal has published its final report on


corruption in the planning process yesterday.
Below is a list compiled by WWN of the reports key
findings. As we see them.
1 Tribunals are big business.

And if you can get a cut of that 20, 000,000 a year


budget then why not drag that mother fucker out as long
as you possibly can? Hence why it took 15 years to do
something which would normally take a few months for an
average paid judge and a handful of solicitors to complete.
Here, Ive an idea: why not put the Mahon tribunal
through a tribunal for spending so much on the tribunal?
Fifteen years after the longest running inquiry into political
corruption in Ireland was established, its final findings
have been published.
Q. So, what was it all about?
A. Corruption. Politicians being bought off in Dublin land
deals by developers and speculators. Labour minister Joan
Burton raised concerns over a cash for votes scandal as
far back as the 1990s and has since warned how
councillors were used as voting fodder. The final module
focused on Quarryvale land on which the Liffey Valley
Shopping Centre sits near Lucan, west Dublin and
subsequently the sometimes bizarre private finances of
senior politicians.
Q. Whos already been named and shamed over
bribery, corruption or payments?
A. Former minister Ray Burke was stoutly defended by
then taoiseach Bertie Ahern before being found to have
accepted corrupt payments.
advertisement

The chief villain of the inquiry, if you like, he went on to be


jailed for tax fraud. His notoriety was summed up
beautifully in a remark attributed to him when asked by a
builder if hed be keeping a receipt for a 30,000 bribe:
Will we fuck.
George Redmond, former assistant Dublin city and county
manager, took payments, the inquiry found. He was jailed
but his conviction for corruption was later quashed. The

late Liam Lawlor, who died in a car crash in Moscow in


2005, was jailed for six weeks in total for refusing to cooperate with the tribunal.
Former government press secretary Frank Dunlop snapped
at the tribunal in 2000 and began naming names. A
lobbyist, he had acted as bagman for developers buying
councillors votes as huge swathes of land in Dublin
switched from farming to industrial, commercial or
residential use. He was also jailed for corruption.
Q. But how did former taoiseach Bertie Ahern end
up in the thick of it?
A. Allegations were made by developer Tom Gilmartin that
Mr Ahern had been paid off by Cork developer Owen
OCallaghan. His evidence including allegations that
Fianna Fil make the mafia look like fucking monks
has gone down in tribunal folklore and sparked the expose
of a bizarre money trail linked to Mr Ahern. The trawl
found digouts, whiparounds, various bank accounts or lack
thereof, currency swaps, bags of cash, and secret
handovers.
Mr Aherns excuses dominated and scandalised the
political landscape from 2006 to 2008 and ultimately, after
14 days of evidence over four years and no findings
against him, he had no option but to resign.
The then taoiseach had sued Denis Starry OBrien, a
businessman from Cork, for making utterly completely
and absolutely false and untrue bribery allegations in
1999.
Q. You say Mr Aherns personal finances were
bizarre, but how unusual are we talking?
A. Let the colourful evidence speak for itself. His bus driver
friend Mick Wall ferried generous donors to a meal in
Manchester, but didnt eat the dinner, and the
businessman walked away with an stg8,000 whiparound,
out of the blue. Four other friends, including Paddy The
Plasterer Reilly, gave him 16,500, also unsolicited,
which may have been to buy a house.
In another digout in 1993-94, the then finance minister
received 22,500 collected unbeknownst to him by friends
including Paddy Reilly, Des Richardson and publican
Charlie Chawke around Christmas 1993. His funds also
came in various denominations dollars, sterling and

punts.
Further untangling produced explanations that 8,000
the profit of racing bets was lodged into accounts held
by his daughters, best-selling author Cecelia and
Georgina, wife of Westlifes Nicky Byrne.
Grinne Carruth, a compelling witness and Mr Aherns
former faithful secretary, broke down in tears after two
days questioning and asked to go home. She finally went
on to change her story to say she lodged sterling cash for
her boss, once best known as the Teflon Taoiseach for his
ability to dodge mud-slinging and sleaze allegations.
Q. Any criticism of the inquiry?
A. Without doubt after 15 years and spiralling costs. But
some credit and leeway is deserved for the planning
corruption and labyrinthine money trails exposed. The
only other critics are those having their finances
inspected. A series of lawsuits to thwart the inquiry ended
last autumn when the High Court cleared the way for the
final report to be published with no advance warning for
concerned parties.
Q. And why did the inquiry cost so much?
A. Thanks to rules under which it was set up ironically
by Mr Ahern to show his government wanted a new era of
politics legal fees rocketed. Barristers for the tribunal
were being paid about 1,000 a day and a handful
became millionaires on the back of it.
Third-party legal fees are a huge part of the estimated
300m costs and are normally only denied for refusal to
co-operate.
Q. Is the Mahon and Flood Tribunal the same thing?
A. The Tribunal of Inquiry Into Certain Planning Matters
and Payments, commonly known as the Mahon Tribunal,
was set up by Dil ireann in 1997 to investigate
allegations of corrupt payments to politicians regarding
political decisions. It has mostly investigated planning
permissions and land rezoning issues in the 1990s in the
Dublin County Council area. Judge Alan P Mahon chaired
the tribunal. The original chairman, who was the sole
member until soon before his retirement, was Judge
Feargus Flood, giving rise to the original common name of
the Flood Tribunal.
The Developers

Or Project Facilitators as the National Asset Management


Agency (NAMA) calls them. Here you will find details of
developers whose loans are reported to be NAMA-bound,
the companies and individuals with whom theyre
associated (or have been associated) and assets linked to
them (again presently or in the past). You will also find
details of developers and bankers who have not been
publicly associated with NAMA, and indeed may never be
they are owners of property that goes beyond a private
residence. There are also overseas property owners with
publicised links to Irish banks.
Note that NAMA has said that it will not normally reveal
the identities of any NAMA borrower and will accord NAMA
borrowers the same confidentiality they would receive at
the original financial institution. The identities of the NAMA
borrowers in the attached spreadsheet and below are
based on press reporting the reporting sources are
shown on the spreadsheet . An updated spreadsheet list
is maintained here. An extract from that list will be
regularly posted below. The list includes the borrower,
associated companies or individuals and associated assets
(note any association might be past or present the press
sources for any information are shown in the comments
fields). Not all the information may display below
depending on your browser settings to access all the
information, you need to access the google docs
spreadsheet above. The regularly updated HOUSE PRICE
DATABASE tab has been moved to the bottom of the
ABOUT tab. Lastly there is a separate spreadsheet
maintained here which shows those developers in which
NAMA has a liquidation, receivership or judgment interest.
First Tranche Associated Cos, individuals
Associated
Assets
Liam Carroll
Roisin Carroll(wife),Zoe, North Quay
Investments, Orthanc, Dunloe, Danninger,
McInerney,,Rambridge Limited, Vantive Holdings, Morston
Investments Limited, Net USA Limited,.Alexion
Management Limited, Bronzone Limited, Astranna Limited,
Villeer Developments, Peytor Developments, Caragh
Enterprises Limited, Parlez International Limied, Danoval

Limited, Jarmar Properties Limited,Tallaght Town Centre


and Construction Limited, Crossman Properties Limited,
Riversmith Limited, Chinook Investments, Oze
Construction, Royceton, Zed Developments, Irish
Continental Group, Bulwark Limited, Crossman Northwall
Limited, Gainsco Limited, Fabrizia Developments, JP Ryan
& Sons (Properties) Limited, Everill Developments Limited,
Feederlink Shipping, Irish Ferries UK, Irish Ferries, Alexion
(Propco) Limited, Alexion PropHoldco Limited, Ronnie
Rentals Limited, Greencore Group PLC, Barrow Echo,
Barrow Gamma, Eppo Developments, David Torpey, John
Pope, Tafica Limited, Elocin Limited, Bohemians, David
Torpey, Bloomburg Limited, Zelderbridge Limited, David
Carson (receiver, Deloitte), Billy ORiordan (receiver,
Pricewaterhouse Coopers), Ken Fennell (receiver,
Kavanagh Fennell), Cherrywood Science and Technology
Park, Cherrywood Properties, Cradder, Frescatti, Giotti,
Vienesse, Nervana, Precidence
AIB HQ, Anglo HQ, 39
UPPER MAYOR STREET, DUBLIN 1, TRANSIT HOUSE, 5 EAST
ROAD (OR SOMETIMES CALLED 5 AND 5A EAST ROAD),
DUBLIN 3, HANBURY LANE, DUBLIN 8, 34 UPPER MAYOR
STREET, DUBLIN 1, 36, 37 AND 38 UPPER MAYOR STREET,
DUBLIN 1, 8 ST. PATRICKS TERRACE, NORTH BRUNSWICK
STREET,
8 ST. PATRICKS TERRACE, NORTH BRUNSWICK STREET,
NO. 2 ST. PATRICKS TERRACE, NORTH BRUNSWICK
STREET, 35 AND 36 UPPER ABBEY STREET
NOS. 1,2,3,4, 5, 6,7 AND 8 ABBEY COTTAGES ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF UPPER ABBEY STREET, DUBLIN 1, DAVITT
ROAD, CRUMLIN, DUBLIN 12, PREMISES SITUATE AT ST.
AUGUSTINE STREET, GREENCASTLE ROAD, COOLOCK,
DUBLIN 5, UPPER SHERIFF STREET, CASTLEFORBES ROAD,
DUBLIN 1, 5 & 7 ST. PATRICKS TERRACE, NORTH
BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, PORTION OF 8 ST. PATRICKS
TERRACE, NORTH BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, 55 NORTH
BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, REAR OF 55 & 56 NORTH
BRUNSWICK STREET TOGETHER WITH 56 NORTH
BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, PORTION OF 57 AND 58
NORTH BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, REAR OF 57 & 58
NORTH BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, REAR OF 87 (87 AND
87A) NORTH KING STREET, DUBLIN, PORTION OF 57, 58 &
59 NORTH BRUNSWICK STREET, DUBLIN, (BUT EXCLUDING

GROUND FLOOR OF PORTION), 90 & 90A NORTH KING


STREET, DUBLIN, 89 NORTH KING STREET, DUBLIN AND 8A
GEORGES LANE, 90, 90A, 91, 92 AND 93 NORTH KING
STREET, DUBLIN ,21-24 CAPEL STREET, 147-151 UPPER
ABBEY STREET, 7/8 JERVIS LANE, DUBLIN 1, 5C EAST WALL
ROAD DUBLIN 3, 13/14 UPPER MAYOR STREET, PARISH OF
ST. THOMAS, CITY OF DUBLIN,NUMBERS 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21 AND 22 UPPER MAYOR STREET , 6 TO 8
CASTLEFORBES ROAD. 1 ACRE SITE SITUATE AT DAVITT
ROAD, CRUMLIN, DUBLIN 12, LANDS AT GREENCASTLE
ROAD, COOLOCK, DUBLIN, 5, NO. 125 FRANCIS STREET,
132 FRANCIS ST., SITE SITUATE AT TURVEY AVENUE
INCHICORE, 58B, 59, 60 AND 61 CORK STREET, IN THE
PARISH OF ST. CATHERINES AND CITY OF DUBLIN, 48-52
CORK STREET, NOS. 17 AND 18 GREAT LONGFORD
STREET, NO. 54 MERCHANTS ROAD, EAST WALL, 23&24
MIDDLE GARDINER STREET, 22. 25,26 & 27 MIDDLE
GARDINER STREET DUBLIN 1, SITE AT BELGARD SQUARE
WEST, TALLAGHT , 25,26, 27 AND 27A MIDDLE GARDINER
STREET, CAPEL STREET, UPPER ABBEY STREET AND JERVIS
LANE, DUBLIN; HANOVER QUAY, DUBLIN, THE 62
APARTMENTS AND 6 TOWNHOUSES SITUATE AT 150-158
NORTH KING STREET, DUBLIN 7, 123-128 CHURCH
STREET, SIX STOREY OVER BASEMENT OFFICE BUILDING
SITUATE AT BOW STREET, Sugar Land company lands
(Carlow), Parkway Valley (Limerick)
, Dalymount Park, Fabrizia site(Ringsend), Sycamore
(Mount Merrion, family home), Chapter House(Dublin),
Tallaght West (Dublin), Horizon Logistics Park (near Dublin
Airport)
Bernard McNamara Moira McNamara (wife), Becbay,
Versonwood, Donatex, Radora Developments, Jerry
OReilly, David Courtney, Varleigh Limited, James
Morrissey, Michael Flannery, Davy Stockbrokers, Grattan
Property Company Limited, Michael McNamara, Ringsend
Property Limited (Ringsend Properties Limited, Davy
investors) , Lochlann Quinn, Martin Naughton, Kieran
McLoughlin, Barry OCallaghan, Paul Maloney, David
Higgins, McNamara EMS, Messina, GPC Nominees, Tourism
Ireland, Arabian McNamara, Killeshin Properties Limited,
Fenbrook, Corcoran Jennison, Pecan Properties, Terry
Sweeney, John Sweeney, Blackshore Holdings, Novorostan,

Gary Smith, Ivor Dougan, Laytar Limited, Michael Hynes,


BMcNCo, Champion Sports, Belltrap Limited, Breydon
Developments, JC Flowers Private Equity II Fund, Anglo
Irish JCF 1 LLP , Mercer Accommodation Group, Michael
McNamara & Sons Building Contractors, Gary Smith, Ivor
Dougan, Kantaka, Shelbourne Hotel Holdings, Marumba
Properties, Paschal Taggart, Terry Cooney, Shane Taggart,
Farrell Grant Sparks (Receiver, Michael McNamara
Construction), Raycastle, Cabland Limited, Glasbay
Limited, Kilbane Estates Limited, Kilmore Developments
Limited, Laytar Limited, Lesdgebrook Limited, Tandrelle
Limited, Versonwood Limited and Michael McNamara & Co,
Catherine Foy, Michael Flannery, Torriam Hotel Operating
Company Ltd, Radoo Lands Limited, Sen Lyne, Noel
Connellan, Cicol Limited, Soltura, Ashdew Limited,
Adenway, Grattenlane Limited (Jerry OReilly), Subamat
Limited, Shorelark Limited, Ashcastle Developments
Limited, Mercer Apartments Management Company,
Mercer Accommodation Group, Lindrake Developments
Irish Glass Bottle site, Shelbourne Hotel, Longboat
Quay, Burlington Hotel, Conrad hotel, Tara Towers,
Montrose Hotel (Lower Kilmacud Road, Dublin, near UCD),
Scribblestown, Elm Park apartments, Killeshin Hotel, SAS
Radisson (Radisson Blu, Galway), Parknasilla Hotel
(Parknasilla Great Southern Western Hotel), Cork
International Airport Hotel, Doha International Airport,
Ailesbury Road (FAMILY home), retail/cinema development
beside The Square (Tallaght), Uniphar Pharma (Tallaght),
Carrisbrook House(Ballsbridge), Bishops Square (Bishops
Square, Aungier Street/Upper Kevin Street), Personal
Injuries Assessment Boards headquarters PIAB (Tallaght),
Superquinn, Finglas Shopping Centre, apartment in the
exclusive Warren Street Condominium (New York), villa in
the Urbanizacion Ancion Playa (Marbella), two properties
in Marbella, Clare People newspaper, 22 Ailesbury Road
(Dublin), Tara Towers Hotel, Mercer Court and the Corrib
Village in Galway, McConnell House (?? Charlemont Place,
Dublin), Texaco House (Audi Centre, Pembroke Road,
Ballsbridge), shares in One51, Mercer Court student
accommodation (Lower Mercer Street, Dublin)
Sean Mulryan Bernadine Mulryan (wife), Ballymore, Sean
Dunne, Peter Bacon, Michael Smurfit, David Brophy,

Markland Holdings (Paddy Kelly), Paul Coulson, Ballymore


Ontario, Irish Nationwide Building Society (INBS), Kelland
Homes, The Geranger Limited, August Partners, Paddy
McKillen, Florentine Property Limited, Ballymore
International Developments, Ballymore Property Holdings
Limited, Vitely Limited (Paddy Kelly), Brambleglen Limited
and Ballymore Developments, Brian Fagan and Barry
Hickey, Arkiva, Ballymore Ireland Group Limited (Isle of
Man), Peltier Investments Limited, RQB, Paddy Kelly, Niall
McFadden, Helsingor Limited, Clearstorm (venture
between Ballymore and Irish Nationwide Building Society)
Irish Glass Bottle site (underbidder), Whitewater
Shopping Centre (Newbridge, Kildare), Pan Penninsula
(London), 1 Snowhill (London), Embassy Quarter, Kudamm
Karree Kudamm Karree ( Kurfrstendamm Ku-Damm
Boulevard Berlin), Eurovea (Slovakia), Kempinski
Hybernska hotel (Prague), Arrowhead Quay, New
Providence Wharf, Wood Wharf, Ontario Tower, Radisson
Edwardian hotel (Canary Wharf), Leamouth Peninsula,
Baltimore Wharf , 47 Citibank branches (New York), Eircom
Park Stadium, Gandon House(Amiens Street), Huguenot
House (St Stephens Green), U2 Tower, Florentine anchor
unit, 21 other shops,110 apartments and nearly 550 car
parking spaces (Bray), The Hermitage Medical Centre
(west Dublin), Snow Hill building 1 (London), Ardenode
Stud Farm (Kildare), Agusta Bell helicopter, 16-acre Unex
site (Royal Docks, London), Minoco Wharf, Manhattan
Wharf, land at Knights Road and Vanesta Wharf, Royal
Canal Park in Dublin 15, The Coast Estate (Baldoyle, north
Dublin)
Derek Quinlan Siobhan Quinlan (wife), Caroline Quinlan
(Caroline Brooks, daughter), Matthew Brooks (son-in-law),
Becbay, Quinlan Private (Avestus), Maybourne Hotel
Group, Mempal, Glen Maud, Gardenprime Limited, Golub
and Company, Paul Coulson, South Wharf PLC, Ardagh
Glass, 25 Canada Square, Propinvest, Coroin, Peter Green,
Kyran McLaughlin, U2 Dave The Edge Evans, U2 Bono
Paul Hewson, Francis Brennan, Dermot Gleeson, Gay
Byrne, Richard Nesbitt, Peter Boylan, Paul Anderson, Igal
Ahouvi, Dorea Investments, First International Bank of
Israel, Electra Real Estate, Delek, Oman Investment Fund,
Paddy Shovlin, Tazbell, Thomas Dowd, Sean Fitzpatrick, Lar

Bradshaw, Pat Doherty, BSQ, Jonathan OConnor, David


Swanton, Niall Browne, Peter Donnelly, Mainstride, SCD
Quinlan Private Balaton Development sarl (Luxembourg
registered), Donal Geaney
Irish Glass Bottle site,
Citigroup building(London Docklands), Jurys Inns,
Santander HQ (Madrid), East 64th Street townhouse (New
York), Derrymore 1&3 Shrewsbury Road(former family
home), Clarence Hotel (Dublin), Four Seasons hotel
(Milan), 47 Marriot hotels, The Estate (Knightsbridge), 27
Old Bond Street, Villa la Carriere (St Jean Cap Ferrat, Saint
Jean Cap Ferrat), land in Malibu (California), La
Commanderie, Epalinges (Switzerland), Georgia Club(US
Golf Club), Allegro site(Sandyford), Bank of Ireland
headquarters (BOI HQ), Arnotts Car Park, The Beacon
South Quarter (Sandyford), Christchurch Car Park, City
Quay Car Park, Convention Centre Dublin Car Park, Croke
Park Events Parking(Clonliffe College), DALKEY CHURCH
CAR PARK, Drury Street Car Park, Fleet Street Car
Park(Temple Bar), HAROLDS CROSS CHURCH CAR PARK,
IFSC Car Park, Irish Life Car Park(Abbey Street), Mount
Carmel Car Park, Parnell Street Car Park, Pavilion Car
Park(Dun Laoghaire), RAHENY CHURCH CAR PARK,
Smithfield Car Park, St. Jamess Hospital Car Park, Tallaght
Hospital Car Park, The Square Town centre (Tallaght), AN
SIBN PUB CAR PARK(DUNSHAUGHLIN), ARDEE TOWN,
ARKLOW TOWN, Audley Square Car Park (Mayfair, London),
Bridge Centre Shopping Centre(Tullamore), GALWAY PCCC
CAR PARK, Hynes Yard Car Park(Galway), M3 MOTORWAY
(DUNBOYNE), M3 MOTORWAY (KELLS), M4/M6 MOTORWAY
(CAPPAGH), MUCKY DUCK PUB CAR PARK (CELBRIDGE),
Parklands Car Park (Tralee), Texas Car Park (Athlone),
University College Hospital Galway Car Park, Whitewater
Shopping Centre, (Newbridge), WICKLOW TOWN car
parking, Neumarkt Galerie (Cologne, Koln, Germany), 6
Shrewsbury Road (Dublin), 43 Ailesbury Road (Dublin),
Beacon South Quarter (Sandyford), The Grange
(Blackrock), 70 Park Avenue (family home, daighter
Caroline Brooks, Sandymount, Dublin), Jamahiriya School
site (Glebe Place, London), development of hotels, villas,
lesiure facilities at Lake Balaton (Hungary), Mall of Sofia
(Sofia, Bulgaria), The Observatory (7-11 Sir John
Rogersons Quay, Dublin), Golf resort near Athens

(Georgia, USA), Palac Flora (Prague, Czech Republic)


Paddy McKillen (Patrick McKillen, Patrick Gerard McKillen)
Padraig Drayne, Maura McKillen (nee Maura
McMenamin, wife), Dean McKillen (son), Maybourne Hotel
Group, Paul McGlade, Avestus(Quinlan Private), Derek
Quinlan, Ronnie Delaney, Liam Cunningham, DC Exhausts,
Abey Developments, Dellway Investments, Fountain
Properties Limited, Canton Caseys Limited, Powerscreen
Indo-China Limited, Powerscreen Equipment (Vietnam)
Limited, Ivor Fitzpatrick, Sean McCormack, Peter Laking,
Pacific Land, Belfast Office Properties Limited, Finbrook
Investments Limited, Metrospa Limited, Berkeley
Properties, Maginotgrange, May Property Holdings, SCI 20
Place Vendome, Directdivide Trading, Submitquest, the
Forge Limited Partnership, Connis Property Services,
Formcrest Construction, Chesterfield (The Pavements)
Subsidiary, Patrick McKillen (son), Johnny Ronan, Pascal
Taggart, Clarendon Properties (Holdings), Clarendon
Property (Holdings), Tony Leonard, Leder Properties,
Deputy Tom Kitt, Geranger Limited, August Partners,
Cashel Developments Limited, Claridges Hotel Limited,
Sean Fitzpatrick, Lar Bradshaw, Pat Doherty, Anglo Golden
Circle, Maple 10 (Fitzpatrick Tapes), Powerscourt Shopping
Centre Limited, John Anthony Leonard (John Leonard),
Talmak Limited Jervis Street Shopping Centre, South Anne
Street development (Dublin),Connaught, Berkeley,
Claridges Hotel, Fosse Park (Leicester), Powerscourt
Centre/Powerscourt Townhouse Centre, Chateau La Coste
(Aix-en-Provence), Quarry(Vinh, Vietnam), Champion
Sports Group, 12 Old Bond Street (Omega), 165-169 New
Bond Street (Asprey), Captain America(Dublin), HaBiotech
(Vietnam), Custom House Square(Belfast), Covent Garden
(London), Frenchgate Interchange(Doncaster), Torquay
Road (Foxrock, family home), K Club (home), The Temple
Bar hotel (Dublin), Treasury Buildings (co-owner with
Treasury Holdings), Pepper Cannister office block(Dublin),
Savoy Centre(Cork), site (Colorado, USA), U2 Tower, 265
Franklin Street (Boston, MA), Victoria Drive (Laguna Beach,
Orange County, California), Seacliff Drive Sea Cliff Drive
(Laguna Beach, Orange County, California), Wilshire
Boulevard 401 (Los Angeles, California), Coast Highway
(Capistrano Beach, California), Habitat building

(Abercrombie Fitch, College Green/Suffolk Street, Dublin),


Powerscourt House shopping centre (South William St,
Dublin)
Treasury Holdings Johnny Ronan(John Ronan), Mary
Ronan (estranged wife), , John Ronan (son), James Ronan
(son), Jodie Ronan (daughter), Richard Barrett, Dick
Barrett, Treasury China Trust (CREO), REO Securities
Limited, Real Estate Opportunities PLC, John Bruder,
Ickendale, Decocter Limited, Havenview Investments
Limited, Castlemarket Holdings Limited (Castle Market
Holdings),Hutchison Port Holdings, CMH CMBS Borrower
Limited, CMH, Fastrock Holdings, Willie McAteer, Spencer
Dock Convention Centre Dublin Limited (SDCCD) Limited,
Construction Management Partnership (CMP), John Sisk
and Son Limited, Spencer Dock Convention Centre Limited
(2) (CCD), Swinwood Limited, Trio Group, Tamorbrick
Limited, Saundby Limited, Ballymun Shopping Centre
Limited, Drocarne, Maurice Harte, Carlton Lane Limited,
Ardquade, Ilderleaf, Ickendel Limited, Conlon family
Battersea Power Station, NAMA HQ, Spencer Dock,
Bewleys Coffee House, Malting Tower, Westin Hotel,
Central Park (Sandyford, Leopardstown ), Montevetro
(Barrow Street, Dublin), 88 Kirtling Street (Battersea),
Heather Cottage, Merchant Quay Shopping Centre,
Stillorgan Shopping Centre, Alto Vetro, 40-42 Mespil Road,
Lafayette Building (Westmoreland Street), Southbank
House (Barrow Street), Baggot Building (Upper Baggot
Street), M1 Business Park (Balbriggan), Port Bremore
(Dublin), Blakes Restaurant (Stillorgan), Ballymun
Shopping Centre, 43-49 Mespil Road, Roundwood Park
Estate, Milverton (Skerries Bay), Lands at Enniskerry, Land
at Glendruid (Cabinteely), 35 Barrow Street, 35 Henry
Street, Crampton Buildings (Temple Bar), Russel Court (St
Stephens Green), Lands at Lehaunstown Lane
(Cabinteely), Clonburris Town Centre, Lands at Kinsealy,
North Wall Quay, Nazareth Lands (Sligo), Collinstown
(Kildare), Lad Lane (Dublin), Leisureplex (Stillorgan),
Charlemont House (Glennon House, Dublin), 3 College
Green, Crescent Hall (Mount Street Crescent), 41 St
Stephens Green, Lands at East Mountain (Howth), 16
Westmoreland Street, Houses at Stillorgan Shopping
Centre, 97 St Stephens Green, 98 St Stephens Green, 99

St Stephens Green, Rear of 22 St Stephens Green, 95 St


Stephens Green, 49 St Lawrences Park (Stillorgan), 72 St
Lawrences Park (Stillorgan), Gordon Street (Ringsend),
Durrow Mews (Dublin), Network House (Barrow Street),
Stewarts Road (Battersea), Cheswick Grange and Hardwick
Grange (Warrington), Spencer Dock, National Convention
Centre, Ritz-Carlton/Ritz Carlton (Powerscourt,Wicklow),
Town Bar and Grill (Dublin), 301-bed hotel and a 54-hole
golf complex on the 377-acre Roundwood Park
Estate(Sean T OCeallaigh Sean T OKelly estate,
Wicklow),development in Tangdao Bay(Qingdao, China),
427-acre site at Milverton Demesne (Skerries, Dublin),
Ballymun Shopping Centre (Dublin), 125-acre tract of Co
Louth land, Wine St Carpark Shopping Centre (Sligo),
Connaught House (Burlington Road, Dublin 4), Dargle
Cottage (Enniskerry, Wicklow)
Michael OFlynn
OFlynn Construction, Tiger
Developments, Blackrock International Land, Victoria Hall
Student Accommodation, Shelbourne Senior Living,
Deputy Michael Martin, Westbrook Partners Elysian
Tower, Swords Business Park, Porschestrasse(Wolfsburg),
Hindenburgstrasse(Monchengladbach, Munchengladbach),
Bremen, Heiligengeiststrasse(Oldenburg),
Visteonstrasse(Kerpen), Aylesham Centre(Peckham),
Ashton Retail Park (Ashton), Eldon Road(Nottingham), St
Michaels House(London City), Harbour Island(London
Docklands), 130 Jermyn Street(London West End),
Granville Place(London NW2), Langas Logistics Park (Adazi
Latvia), Citygate (Sheffield), Drayton Dairy (Portsmouth),
Drummon Street (London NW1), Haymarket(60,000sq m of
offices, a 240-bed Travelodge hotel, and 5,400 sq ft of
retail, with 381 car parking spaces, Morrisson Street,
Edinburgh), Drumkettle (Glanmire, Cork), 435-bed student
building near Wembley Stadium in London
Joe OReilly (Joseph OReilly) Castlethorn, Chartered
Land, Paddy McKillen, Ramford, Liam Maye, John
McLoughlin, Aeval Limited, Dominic Deeney, John
Lewis(anchor, Carlton site Dublin), Teba Limited,
Crossridge Investments Limited, Castlethorn Construction,
Anglo Golden Circle, Gamine Trading Limited, Jeremiah
OReilly & Associates, Grattenlane Limited, Belltrap
Limited, Crossridge, Firth Developments, Lenridge

Properties, James Colgan, Eamon Cox


Dundrum
Shopping Centre, Killeen Castle development (golf
complex, Co Meath), Avoca (Blackrock),
Carysfort(Blackrock), Rathborne (Ashtown),
Belarmine(Stepaside), Woodbrook(Castleknock), Ilac
Centre and Swords Pavilions Shopping Centre (Pavilion
Shopping Centre), Eircom site (South King Street, Dublin),
Royal Dublin Hotel (OConnell Street), Quinta Do Lago
(villa, Portugal), Carlton Cinema site (OConnell Street,
Dublin), Grand Canal Theatre, house at Kerryland Avenue,
Kerrymount Avenue(Foxrock, Dublin), apartments at
Riverhall(Castleknock, Dublin), Adamstown Square 3
(Adamstown, South Co Dublin), 16 Moore Street (Dublin),
342 new homes in Dunshaughlin (Co Meath), land at
Skerries (Co Dublin), lands at St Josephs in Clonsilla,
properties on the southside of Dublin, including a block on
Charlemont Street and on Bishops Square, which it leases
to the Office of Public Works, Aghadoe Heights Hotel and
Spa (Killarney, Kerry), Shelbourne Hotel (Dublin), Radisson
Blu Hotel (Galway), land it owns on the Diswellstown Road
in Porterstown, near Blanchardstown, Merrion House
(Merrion Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin 4)
Gerry Gannon Margaret Gannon(wife), Gannon Homes,
Gannon Group, Michael Smurfit, Gatland Properties,
Gatland Property, Dublin Airport Authority, Ollimar
Properties, Ulick McEvaddy, Des McEvaddy, Gannon
Homes (UK) Limited, Senator Ivor Callely, Bishopscourt
Investments/Bishopcourt Investments (51% Smurfit, 49%
Gannon), Charlie McCreevy, Noreen McCreevy, Anglo
Golden Circle K-Club, 74-acre Lodge Park, Belcamp
College, Robswall development (Malahide), Plaza offices
and shopping centre (Malahide Road), Rockfield
development, Parnells GAA playing fields, National
Museum(tenant), Oldtown/Mooretown (3400 homes,
shopping centre), Malahide Marina, Hatley Manor(banks
of the Shannon), Summercove(Kinsale), apartments at
Malahide Marina Village, land banks at Dublin Airport, land
at Clontarf Golf Club and the midlands, Eglin Road
(Ballsbridge),house in the K Club, apartments in Malahide
and at Lough Glynn, St Fintans Road (family home,
Howth), 52 acres at Carrackbrack Road (Howth), property
at Elgin Road (Ballsbridge), a property in Templeogue

(Dublin), five properties on Strand Road(Portmarnock,


Dublin), two properties on Seaview Avenue(Clontarf,
Dublin), Casino House (Malahide)
Gerry Barrett (Gerard Barrett) Catherine Barrett (wife),
Edward Holdings group, Topaz, Radical, JC Flowers Private
Equity II Fund, Anglo Irish JCF 1 LLP , KH Kitty Hall
Holdings, Ashford Castle Estate Limited (ACEL) , ML
Meyrick Limited, Niche Hotels, MD Merlin Developments
Limited, Talebury Properties, Radical Properties,
Ashford
Castle, G Hotel, Enwest oil terminal, Scotch Hall
development, Edward Square development (Donnybrook,
Dublin), Hatch Hall (Hatch Street, Dublin 2), Jurys Hotel
(Limerick), Grand Canal Dock hotel, Bow Street
Magistrates court (London), Meyrick Hotel (Eyre Square,
Galway), D Hotel (Drogheda), Corrib Great Southern hotel
(Galway)
Joe Cosgrave, Peter Cosgrave, Michael Cosgrave Nadine
Cosgrave (wife of Michael Cosgrave), Denise Cosgrave
(nee Denise McDonnell, wife of Joe Cosgrave), Oonagh
Cosgrave (wife of Peter Cosgrave),Cosgrave Property
Group, Helen Cosgrave(sister), Willie Cosgrave, Paul
McGrath(spokesman), Jack Cosgrave(father, decedent),
Cosgrave Property Developments, G&T Crampton,Deputy
Joe Jacob, Deputy Joe Behan, Oonagh Cosgrave (wife of
Peter Cosgrave), Knightsbridge Properties, Knightsbridge
Property, Borg Developments Dun Laoghaire Golf Course,
West End Retail Park, Radisson SAS St Helens Hotel
(Stillorgan, Dublin), 215-219 Oxford Street (London 1.1
acres), 301-307 Oxford Street(London), Jubilee House
(Oxford Street, London), Libert Shopping Centre(Romford),
Caxton Gate retail centre (Birmingham), six properties and
nine car parking spaces on Fitzwilliam Quay(Dublin),
Sandycove Avenue East (family home Peter Cosgrave,
south Dublin), Sweepstakes complex (Ballsbridge),
apartments at Grace Park Manor (Drumcondra, Dublin), an
apartment in the Lisalea complex (Frascati Park,
Blackrock), two apartments in the Northumberlands
complex (Lower Mount Street, Dublin), apartment at
Derrynane Square (Dorset Street, Dublin), Sir Patrick Duns
Hospital (Lower Grand Canal Street), 7 Hillside Drive
(Rathfarnham, Dublin)
Second Tranche

Sean Dunne
Gayle Killilea(wife), Jennifer Dunne (nee
Coyle, ex-wife), Stephen Dunne (son, 1st marriage), Nivek
Begley (daughter-in-law to be), Ross Connolly, Mountbrook
(Mavior Limited), Mountbrook Homes, Hiberbian Life and
Pensions, DCD Builders, David Sharkey, Matsack
Nominees, D4 Stores, John Dunne(son), Warren Private
Clients, Berland Homes, David Shubotham, Paul Coulson,
Sean Mulryans Ballymore Properties, Mountbrook USA,
Mountbrook Merrion Road Development, Thomas Heagney,
Zrko Limited, Qulpic Limited, Molly Blossom LLC, Pat Kenny
(RTE), Sean Mulryan, Denis Desmond, MJBCH, Waterside
Kilcock Property Company (Isle of Man), Mavior, Barclay
Beattie and Brown LLC, Hollybrook (Brighton Road)
Management Co Limited, Waterside Kilcock Property
Company (Isle of Man), Gina Farrell Jurys Doyle site Jurys
Hotel, The Towers Hotel (Ballsbridge), Berkeley Court
hotel, Bloodstone building, Riverside, AIB
Bankcentre(Ballsbridge), Hume House (Ballsbridge),
Walford(Shrewsbury Road, family home),D4 Stores (Gayle
Killilea), Newbridge Whitewater shopping centre, d4hotel
group (Ballsbridge Inn, Ballsbridge Towers and D4
Berkeley, formerly known as the Berkeley Court Hotel), 20
acres at UCD, Goatstown(Dublin), 421 Field Point Road
(Greenwich, Connecticut CT 06830), 38 Bush Avenue
(Greenwich, Connecticut CT 06830), Charles development
in Greystones (Co Wicklow), 20A Shrewsbury Road (Dublin,
rented to South African embassy), Zed Candy factory site
(Kilcock, Dublin), Auragh ( Shrewsbury Road, Dublin),
Coneyboro (Athy, Kildare)
Paddy Kelly
Redquartz Group, Haytonvale
Developments, McCormack family, Alanis Capital, Origin 8,
Niall McFadden, RQB Limited, Redquartz Boundary Limited,
Paul Pardy. Durkan New Homes, Newlyn Group (Christy
Dowling, George McGarry, Robert Kehoe), Choice Hotels,
Frankie Whelehan, Maureen Kelly(wife), Hugh OReagan,
Dolores Barry, Patrick Dunning, Simon Kelly (son), Joanna
Kelly (wife), Pressaro Limited, Emma Kelly (daughter),
Christopher Kelly (son), John Walsh. John Kelly, Connor
Mallaghan, Swindon Investments, Jed Pierse, Fusano
Properties, John Flynn, Joe Linders, Richard Delaney, Pat
Ryan, Niall Mellon, Arnotts, Deputy Charlie OConnor, Irish
Italian Property Holdings, IIPH, Declan Cassidy, Boundary

Capital, Philip Lynch (One51), RQB Resort LP, RQB


Development LP, PerellaWeinberg Partners, Neil Durkan,
Liam Kelly (brother), Clarion Hotel Steamboat Quay Coownership Investment (John Fraher, James Kelly, Michael
Moriarty, Roddy Lyons, Michael OBrien, Tom Jones, Denis
Healy, Noel Mahony, Liam McLoughlin, Peter Cagney,
Kevin Hamell, Brian McKeogh, William Greaney, Jerry
McSweeney, Louis Bourke, Simon Kelly, Sean Lally,
Anthony Cooney, Peter Redden). Norbert OReilly, Cuffe
(Malta) Limited, Ray Byrne, Jean Pierre Ellul Castaldi,
Heuston Hospitality, Redquartz Hospitality, Gracelyn
Limited, Real Gourmet Burger, Independent Leisure
Solutions, Thomas Read, Prem, Choice, Fresh supermarket
group
Pizarro,Pragelato ski resort, Sarasota, National
College of Ireland, Clarion Hotel, Ivory Building, Maldon
Hotel, Gallery Quay, Sir John Robertsons Quay (Sir John
Rogersons Quay), Lisloughrey Lodge hotel(Cong, Mayo),
Clonmore( former family home, Shrewsbury
Road,Chinese Embassy), apartment on Morehampton Road
(family home), 47 Citibank branches (New York), Morrison
Hotel (Dublin), Fusano Development (Smithfield Market,
Dublin), Burlington Plaza (4,6,8 Burlington Road), Jurys
Ballsbridge (underbidder), Carton House golf resort
(Kildare), Sawgrass Marriott Resort (Florida), Bray Golf
Club, Tulfarris House hotel and golf resort (Blessington.
Wicklow), Gandon House(Amiens Street), former Industrial
Yarns site on the Dublin Road, Hotel Phoenicia (Malta),
Tramco nightclub (Rathmines, Dublin)
Ray Grehan
Glenkerrin Homes Limited, Danny Grehan
(brother), P Elliot Group, Ashford Partnership, The St
Lohmans Partnership, Lauderdale Limited
The Grange
apartment complex (Stillorgan/Blackrock, Dublin), UCD
Veterinary College, Ballsbridge One, Ballintyre Hall
(Ballinteer), St Edmunds (Palmerstown), Palma de
Mallorca(apartment and yacht), The Forge (Canary Wharf),
City Pride (Canary Wharf), The Arcadia (Ealing), Island
Point (Isle of Dogs, London), Crowne Plaza/Hotel St
Gregory (Shoreditch, London), Maynooth Business
Campus, The Glenroyal Centre, The Glenroyal Hotel, Coach
House Square, Techrete development in Howth (Co Dublin
next to Dart station), Windsor House (Bedford Street,
Belfast)

Niall Mellon
Knockrabo Developments, Niall J Mellon
group, Mellon Financial Service, Niall Mellon Township
Trust, Nicola Mellon (wife), Sean Dunne, Niall J Mellon
Limited (dissolved), OMalley Developments, Earthquake
Property Partners, Irish Life, Paddy Kelly, Citi Gate Glasgow
Limited Bank of Ireland playing fields at Knockrabo
House a 7.5-acre site off Mount Anville Road (Goatstown,
Dublin 14), The Voice (local newspaper group, folded),
Ferrara Quay, Seagate (Cardiff), Temple Quay North
(Bristol), St Thomas Street (Redcliffe, Bristol), The
Bridge(Glasgow), Osbourne House(Coventry), Queens
Court(Hull), Eminence (Bristol), Ropewalk(Nottingham),
Charleville Hotel, Tramco nightclub (Rathmines, Dublin),
Taylors Three Rock Hotel (Rathfarnham), Henry Grattan
pub (Baggott Street), Castleknock Marina Hotel, Spire
Court (Birmingham), Postbox(Birmingham),
Viva(Birmingham), Merchants Gate (Bristol), Essex House
(Birmingham), Temple House (Birmingham), Meridian Quay
(Swansea), The Core(Bristol), City Park (Glasgow), Marlay
Grange House (Rathfarnham), Coolmore country house
estate on 242 acres (near Thomastown, Co Kilkenny),
Cedarmount (family home, Mount Merrion Dublin)
Paddy Shovlin Landmark Developments, Beacon Medical
Group, Derek Quinlan, Patrick Fitzpatrick, Tony Fitzpatrick,
Toudic, Jud Developments, Ria Properties, Paul
McCann(Grant Thornton), Taleside Developments, Neysos
Limited, Gerry Purcell (son of Seamus Purcell), Simon
Coyle (receivers, Mazars), GVA Grimley (receivers), SkyHeli
Limited, Conrick Developments Limited Bank of Ireland
headquarters (BOI HQ Baggott St), Beacon South Quarter,
Beacon Court, Gateway(Sandyford), Morgan Hotel(Temple
Bar), Blakes restaurant (Stillorgan), One King William
Street 1 King William Street (London), 1.5 acre mixed use
development at Old Bray Road (Foxrock, Dublin)
Bovale Developments
Tom Bailey, Michael Bailey (Mick
Bailey), Bovale Limited (UK), Castle Farm Telford Ltd
Liability Partnership (LLP), Charles Collie Charlestown
Shopping Centre, Balgriffin
Noel Smyth
Anne-Marie Smyth (wife), Nigel Kinnaird,
Alburn Investments, Stewart Harrington, Ben Dunne
(client), Dunloe Ewart, Redfern Limited, Turn the Tide of
Suicide, Alburn Real Estate, Alburn Real Estate Capital,

Highcross, Gatak Real Estate, John Caldwell, Tom McFeely,


Larry OMahony, Cal Investments, Quinlan Private clients,
the McCormack family, Mercury Engineering, Michael
Semple, Bernard Doyle, David Courtney, David Simpson,
Anthaun Xavier, Alburn Tradeston, Real Estate
Opportunities, Monway Limited, Fitzwilliam Finance
Corporation Limited, Therese Properties, Arkbay, Richelle
Square shopping centre (Tallaght), Odyssey Pavillion
(Belfast), Unit three Arkle Road (Sandyford Industrial
Estate, Dublin), portfolio of 45 UK properties in Alburn Real
Estate Capital CMBS, development at Tradeston
(Clydeside, Scotland), house in Eaton Square (Belgravia,
London), Regency Apartments (Westminster, London),
Lambert Court in Eastleigh, Project House in Tottenham
Court Road, Waterdale Centre in Doncaster, Lisieux Hall
(family home, Murphystown Road, Sandyford, Dublin)
Pat Doherty
Harcourt Developments, Airscape Limited,
Henry Doherty (son), John Doherty (son), Niall Doherty
(son), Nicholas Doherty (son), Patrick Joseph Doherty
(son), Doreen Doherty (daughter), Cara Doherty
(daughter), Waterfront Enterprise Board (WEB. Jersey),
Glen, Smith and Glen Development (GSG Development),
Mike Murphy (former broadcaster) and Andrew Parker
Bowles, the ex-husband of Camilla Parker Bowles, Lindat
Developments, Titanic Island Limited, Titanic Quarter, Ivy
Wood Properties, Ivy Wood Colleges, Titanic Properties,
Titanic Investments (registered in Jersey, Channel Islands),
Dermot Desmond, Duke of Abercorn, Ken Campbell, Mike
Smith, Conal HarveyBelfast Titanic Quarter, Park West
Business Park, Royal Oasis (Bahamas), Carlisle Bay Hotel
(Antigua), Days Hotel (Dublin), The Wyndham Grand Hotel
(London), Princess on Portland Hotel (Manchester), Lough
Eske Hotel, Grand Central, Redcastle hotel (Donegal), Riga
Business Park (Riga), Sullivan Square (Las Vegas),
Kensington High Street, Esplanade Square(Jersey), a
substantial holding at nearby Citywest, which is planned
for residential development, development at North Point
near Dublin Airport, a 50% interest in the site of the
former Royal Hasler Hospital in Portsmouth, Laois
Shopping Centre (Portlaoise)
David Courtney,Jerry OReilly (Jeremiah OReilly, Gerry
OReilly) Spain Courtney Doyle (SCD), Bernard

McNamara, Radora, Messina Investments, Fenbrook


Holdings, Robert Ball, Albert Farrell, Bernard Doyle, Pecan
Properties, Terry Sweeney, Superquinn, SRH consortium,
Select Retail Holdings, Marumba, Eileen Courtney (wife of
David Courtney), Kantaka, Shelbourne Hotel Holdings,
Jeremiah OReilly Associates Limited, Eamon Shields,
Thomas Walsh, Gamine, Ashdew Limited, Gamine Trading
Limited, Dalegrove Taverns Limited, Kings Island
Developments Limited, Grattenlane Limited (Bernard
McNamara), Active Facilities Property Management,
Tabmaz Partnership (Terry Sweeney), Zorooni Limited,
Absolute Hotel Limerick Limited
Shelbourne Hotel, Elm
Park,Bishops Square (Bishops Square, Aungier
Street/Upper Kevin Street), Texaco House (Audi Centre,
Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge), Friends First (Adelaide Road),
Kilkenny Ormonde Hotel (Kilkenny), Kilcoran Lodge Hotel,
Aghadoe Heights Hotel (Killarney, Kerry), Derrynane Hotel,
SAS Radisson (Galway), Kings Island (Limerick),
Brooklodge Hotel, Harcourt Square, Finglas Village,
Tallaght Retail Centre, Faculty Building(Ballsbridge), twostorey Victorian property on Belgrave Square (family
home, Rathmines, Dublin), Superquinn, 24-acre site at
Ballymadun, Co Meath, Absolute Hotel (Limerick),
McConnell House (Charlemont Place, Dublin with Bernard
McNamara), Carrisbrook House (Ballsbridge), garda car
pound in Tallaght (Dublin)
Tom Considine, Paddy Sweeney, Gerry Prendergast Spain
Courtney Doyle (SCD), Bernard McNamara, Radora,
Messina Investments, Fenbrook Holdings, Robert Ball,
Albert Farrell, Bernard Doyle, Pecan Properties, Terry
Sweeney, Superquinn, SRH consortium, Select Retail
Holdings, Marumba, Eileen Courtney (wife of David
Courtney), Kantaka, Shelbourne Hotel Holdings,
Oberstown Developments Limited, Bandenberry Limited,
Maplefern Holdings Limited
Millennium Park
(Osberstown), garda offices in Harcourt Square, Dublin 2
Castlelands Construction John Barry, Elaine Barry,
Castlelands Construction Company UK Limited, Conor
Pyne (liquidator, OConnor Pyne)
Mallow Business Park,
The Mews (Mallow), Rose Hill (Kilkenny), Abbey Wood
(Midleton), Castle Court (Whitechurch), Castle Rock
(Midleton), Castle Park Village (Mallow), Castle Heights

(Carrigaline), Castle Park (Mallow), Caisleann na hAbhann


(Limerick), Castle White (Whitechurch), Castle Redmond
(Midleton), Tidal Basin Tower (London), helicopter, private
jet
David Arnold D2 Private, Nollaig Partnership, Liffey
Partnership, Leigh Arnold (daughter), Marcus Sweeney,
Deirdre Foley, D2 Property Management Limited, Michael
McAteer (receiver, Grant Thornton), Victoria SA, Scott
Portfolio Unit Trust, Grasmere Partnership
One
Warrington Place, Four Seasons Hotel (Ballsbridge, Dublin),
Fernhill Estate (Stepaside, Dublin), Backlands (Stepaside,
Dublin), Gortanore (Brighton Road, Foxrock, Dublin),
Woolgate Exchange (Basinghall Street, London), 1-19
Victoria Street (Westminster, London), 15 properties
leased as bank branches to Halifax, Hazelmere
(Westminster Road, Foxrock)
Second or Later Tranches
Menolly HomesSeamus Ross, Moira Ross (wife), Seamus
Ross Junior (son), Deputy Liam Lawlor, Arthur French, John
Bosco French (son), French Estates, Brisa Developments
Limited, Anglo Golden Circle, Killoe Developments, Michael
Fingleton, Menolly BV Netherlands Dunboyne Castle
Hotel, Dylan Hotel (Dublin), Drynam Hall, Beaufort, Myrtle,
K Club, Barberstown House(Clonsilla, family home),
Farmleigh Woods (Phoenix Park), properties at Harrington
Street (Dublin), Village Centre (Lucan), Lower Rathmines
Road (Dublin), Las Parcelas de Golf in Nueva Andalucia
(Puerto Banus, Spain), Drynam Hall, Beaupark and Myrtle
estates (Dublin), resort development in Kotor
(Montenegro)
Albany Homes David Daly, Mary Daly (wife), Joanne Daly
( ), Paul Daly (), Belmont Homes, Trident Homes, Rory
ODonnell, BBT (auditors), David Daly Property
Management, Kelobridge Limited, Galliard Homes Airside
Retail Park, Kelobridge, 300 new homes on the landlocked
26-acre field at Castleview (Slough, UK). Franklin
House(Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge), River Island and
adjacent store (Grafton Street, Dublin), Sans Souci clothing
boutique (Malahide), Louis Vuitton Flagship store (New
Bond Street), Greenwood (Coolock, Dublin), Prospect
Manor (Rathfarnham, Dublin), Swords Demesne (Swords,
Dublin), Swords Downs (Co. Dublin), Blanchardstown

Heath (Dublin), Castleview (Swords, Dublin), Holywell


(between Malahide and Swords, north Dublin), Clare
Village (Clarehall village, Malahide Road), Abbeystone
(between Malahide and Swords, north Dublin), 16 St
Stephens Green (Peploes Restaurant, Dublin), Torquay
Road (family home, Foxrock), 87 St Stephens Green
(Garda Inspectorate, Dublin), 18-21 St Stephens Green
(ESB International, Dublin), Estuary House, New Street,
Malahide, Co Dublin (family home)
Profile Properties
David Agar
Beacon Quarter,
Harcourt Building, Westland Park
Galliard HomesHilden Developments, Stephen Conway,
Jack Petchey, Millharbour Developments Limited,
Jefferson Hotels LLP, Jefferson Hotels (Cardiff), Jefferson
Hotels (Watford), Washington Hotels LLP, Gary McCollum,
Triland (Chiltern Street) 600 homes at the old Barbour
mill (Hilden Mill), 32-storey tower and ten-storey building
with apartments, and a hotel south of Canary Wharf
(London), New Capital Quay (London Docklands), Chiltern
Street car park residential development (Marylebone,
London West End)
Larry OMahony/Tom McFeely(Thomas McFeely)/(Laurence
OMahony)
Derek McFeely (brother), Lowe Taverns,
Aifca Limited, Tallaght Plaza Hotel Ltd, Codex Taverns Ltd,
Oakleaf Construction Ltd, Coalport Building Company
Limited, Noel McFeely, Conal McFeely, Gerard McFeely
The Square Shopping Centre, Ard Erdrad Mulhuddart,
38 acres Dunboyne, The Plaza Hotel(Tallaght), Lowe
licence, Ailesbury Road (McFeely family home), Ashbury
(Roscrea), properties on Dublins North King Street, in
Phibsboro, the Tallaght Plaza Hotel and a holiday home
and hotel in the Algarve, Cathedral Hill (Raphoe, Donegal,
Co. Donegal) The Athena apartment block on High Street
(Stratford, London)
John Flynn
Paddy Kelly, Larry Goodman, Sean Mulryan,
Coolbrook Developments Limited, Fusano Properties,
Hermitage, Eamon Fitzgerald, George Duffy Bray
Shopping Centre, Hermitage Medical Clinic (Old Lucan
Road in Dublin 20),4,6,8 Burlington Road(Dublin),
Smithfield Market Development, Lighthouse Cinema
(Smithfield Market)
Park Developments Michael Cotter (Mick Cotter), Angela

Cotter nee McInerney (wife), Manciano, Park


Developments (Industrial), Paystros Limited, Aratus,
Ambleland (Britain), Lambourne Estates (Britain),
Earlsland Corporation, Quorn Securities, Frank McInerney,
Amby McInerney, Sara McInerney, Hamilton Osborne King
(HOK), Irish Home Builders Association, Richard Barret,
John Ronan, Noel Smyth, Joe OReilly, Liam Maye
(decedent), Rathdown Light Rail, GNet, Michael Moyna
(Indigo), Muinellim,John Sisk and Son, Sispar consortium
(Park Developments and John Sisk and Son), Viscount
Securities, Wicklow County Council Carrickmines Wood,
Hyde Building (Carrickmines), Fashion City (Dublin), M50
Business Park, Glencairn (Sandyford), Mount St Annes
(Milltown), The Park (Cabinteely), Keltstown (Foxrock),
scheme at Cherry Orchard (Ballyfermot), North West
Business Park (Ballycoolin), 12 acres at Dublin Airport ,
Greystones Harbour, 438 housing units in Diswellstown
(Castleknock, Dublin), sailing club in Villefranche on the
Cote dAzur
Maybourne Hotel Group Paddy McKillen, Derek Quinlan,
John McColgan, Moya Doherty, Kyran McLoughlin, Davy
Stockbrokers Connaught, Claridges, Berkeley Hotels,
Savoy(sold)
Kimpton Vale Limited
Laurence Keegan, Mairead
Keegan (wife), Sarah Keegan, Sean Keegan, Torose
Construction Limited, Deputy Joe Behan, Kimpton Vale
Partnership
Irish Glass Bottle site, Carpenterstown
Road (family home, Castleknock, Dublin), developments at
Castleknock and Templeogue
McInerney
Thomas McInerney(decedent, founder),
Barry OConnor, Ned Sullivan, Hillview Developments
Limited, McInerney Homes Limited, McInerney Contracting
Limited, Augusta Developments Limited, William
Hargreaves Limited, Space Developments Limited, Bowey
Homes Limited, Lancing Homes Limited, Alanda Homes
Alanda (Spain), Cushnine Limited, Cone Pine Properties
Limited, Burberry Developments Limited, Aldara
Developments Limited, Ritford Limited, Radalley Limited,
Zella (Waterford) Limited, Lanby Developments Limited,
Hillview (Watford) Limited, Deputy Martin Cullen, Oaktree
Capital, Tommy Drumm, McInerney Services (treasury),
Mark Shakespeare, David Nabarro, ohn Garratt and Kevin

Lynch
The Village at Adare Manor, Broomfield Estate
(Cork), Shannon Airport runway, UCD Science buildings,
Vantage Business Park (Enfield, UK)
Fleming Group Tivway, John J Fleming Construction, JJ
Fleming Holdings, Donban, John Fleming, Noreen Fleming
(wife), Fleming Energy, Plymouth Energy LLC, George
Maloney (Baker Tilly Ryan Glennon , examiner), Patrick
Monaghan (KPMG, receiver), Michelle Fleming, Noreen
Fleming, Tom Kavanagh (Kavanagh Fennell, liquidator),
Salvesen Insulated Frames, Fusion Building Systems, Tom
Salvesen, George Maloney(liquidator, Baker Tilly Ryan
Glennon), Fuchsia Homes, Aldi, Billy ORiordan (receiver,
Pricewaterhouse Coopers), Fleming Developments UK
Limited, Fleming Homes, Sipter, Pearse Farrell (FGS), The
Fota Island Company, Moundtech Properties, Cityking
International, Fusion Structural Buildings, JJ Fleming
Construction (Sandyford) Limited, Fota Island Services,
Sipter Limited, Picerno Limited, Beara Mining Limited,
Flemar Limited, Kilronan Windfarm Limited, Fusion
Building Systems (UK) Limited, Fleming Developments
(UK) LImited, Wharfside Regeneration (Ipswich) Limited,
Brabco Ipswich Limited, Fleming Holdings USA Inc,
Rushbrooke Links Management Company Limited,
Chandlers Rest Management Company Limited,
Heatherfield Waterfall Management Company Limited,
Buttery Wall Management Company Limited, Fota Island
Lodges Limited, The Stepaside Parkview Management
Company Limited, Deburgo Management Company
Limited, Inchydoney Island Management Company
Limited, Courtmacsharry Cois Cuain Management
Company Limited, Clover Meadows Management Company
Limited, Grande Central (now Rockbrook Grande Central),
Ringport Management Company Limited, Trinity Court
Management Limited, West Cork Technology Park
Management Company Limited, West Cork Technology
Building D Management, West Corl Technology Building H
Management, Rushbrooke Centre Management Company
Limited, Castlebrack Developments, Glenard Patents
Limited, Courtmacsharry Sailing and Leisure Limited,
Stonemeadow Limited, Antowan Limited, Tarmac Fleming
(Quarries) Limited, JJ Fleming Holdings, Fleming Holdings
Worldwide,. Fleming Global Limited, John J Fleming

Construction Company, Fleming Developments, John


Fleming Properties, Biomedy Limited, Fuchsia Homes,
Fusion Building Systems, Glencairn Developments, Tanzia
Developments, Cadmaxi Trading, Rockbrook
development (Sandyford), sites in Sandyford,Boulevard
development (Sandyford Industrial Estate), Sentinel
building, Holbrook Close Billericay (England), 57-acre
site(Iowa), lodge and spa (Inchydoney, west Cork), the
Radisson Hotel (Limerick), the Sheraton hotel and golf
resort (Fota Island, Cork), 225-bedroom three-star hotel,
158 residential units and commercial units on land on
Olympic Way (Wembley stadium, north-west London),
houses at Allerton Bywater (Leeds, UK), Earls Well,
Waterfall, (Cork), Inis Alainn, Inchydoney, (Cork), Ard
Aoibhinn, Inishannon, (Cork), Cooline, Ballyvoloon, Cobh,
(Cork), Ardfield, Grange, Douglas, (Cork), College Wood,
Mallow, (Cork), Tir Cluain, Midleton, (Cork), The Glenties,
Macroom, (Cork), The Orchard, Macroom, (Cork), Ard
Sionnach, (Cork), Cois Cuain, Courtmacsherry, (Cork),
Castlerock, Castleconnell, (Cork), Clover Meadows,
(Waterford), The Pines, Cobh, (Cork), Parkview, Stepaside,
(Dublin), Buttery Court, Mallow (Cork), Rushbrooke
Centre, Cobh, (Cork)
Harry Crosbie Rita Crosbie (wife), Live Nation,
Amphitheatre Ireland Limited, Point Village Development
Limited Grand Canal Theatre, Point Village (North Wall
Quay), Gibson Hotel, Dublin Eye, Point Depot, Hanover
Quay(home), Watchtower(scuppered), Vicar Street, O2,
transport companies, Clarence Hotel, Creighton Street
development, Odeon Cinema complex
Shelbourne Development Group
Garrett Kelleher
(Garret Kelleher), Emmet OReilly, Fergus Murphy
Chicago Spire, 41.5-acre site at Kishogue, in the
Balgaddy/Clonburris strategic development zone, land at
Cooldrinagh, near Leixlip
Mohammed Al-Fayed
Harrods, Fulham Football Club
Harrods Store (Knightsbridge), Craven Cottage
(Fulham)
Hugh OReagan (Hugh ORegan)
Thomas Read
Holdings, Dashaven, Clubko, Martin Ferris (receiver), David
Hughes (receiver, Ernst and Young) 141-bedroom Morrison
Hotel (Merchants Quay, Dublin), Thomas Read pubs (eg

Ron Blacks, Searsons, Pravda), Kiltiernan Hotel Kilternan


Hotel (project, New Sping Field), 330 acres (Kilternan),
Thomas Read Cutlers (Parliament Street), former Hibernian
United Services Club (St Stephens Green), Diamond Coast
Hotel (Enniscrone, Co Sligo)
Simon Kelly
Joanna Kelly (wife), Paddy Kelly (father),
Redquartz Limited (Red Quartz), Alan McCormack, Karl
Dunne, Coolbrook Developments, Coolbrook Limited, John
Flynn, Prem Group, Premier Office Centres, Alson Woods
International Limited, Vara Nominees Limited, Sunstreak
Properties Limited, KF Internet Software Limited
Thomas Read pubs, Gallery Quay, Clarion Quay,
Sanovitae Gym chain, Junction (Foley Street, Talbot
Street), 4,6,8 Burlington Road (Burlington Plaza), Tara
Street, Sandyford development, Days serviced apartments
(Dublin, Manchester, Liverpool, Bristol, Nottingham), Irish
Nationwide centre (Camden Street), The Biz Superstore,
Emex, The Old Rectory, Dunganstown (family home,
Wicklow)
John Flanagan (John D Flanagan), Gerard Lillis (Gerry Lillis)
Atlantis Developments Limited, Liscannor Properties,
Ted Joyce, Jaguar Fund
Ballykilty Manor Hotel and
Holiday Complex(Clare), Peacockes Hotel (Maam
Cross,Galway), Tr Gan an House Hotel and Holiday
Complex (Doolin, Clare), the Smerwick Harbour
Hotel(Dingle, Kerry), Burren Coast Hotel and Holiday
Lodges (Ballyvaughan, Clare), Cliffs of Moher Hotel
(Liscannor, Clare), Joseph McHughs pub (Liscannor),
Ballyvara House (Doolin), land at Quin, Co Clare.
Michael Kelly Glandore Partnership, Glandore Business
Centres Hume Street Hospital(Hume Street, Dublin)
Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) North
Wall Quay/Mayor Street Management Limited, Becbay
Limited, Grand Canal Harbour Management Company
Limited, The Jeanie Johnston (Sailing Ship) Limited,
Custom House Quay Event Limited, Dublin Docklands
Affordable Housing Limited, Shelbourne Plaza (Block B)
Management Company Limited, Butlers Court (Black B)
Management Limited, Professor Niamh Brennan, Michael
McDowell(husband), Donal OConnor, Paul Maloney, Neil
Mulcahy, Wilson Hartnell PR, Sean FitzPatrick, Lar
Bradshaw, Mary Moylan (Department of the Environment),

Declan McCourt (Bank of Ireland), Angela Cavendish


(Alexsam Corporate Finance), Donall Curtin, Niamh
OSullivan ( Arup), Joan OConnor, Irish Glass Bottle site,
Anglo Headquarters HQ (North Wall Quay, Dublin)land in
the Grand Canal Harbour area, Grand Canal Square, Grand
Canal Theatre, chq building, Jeanie Johnston ship, Liffey
island, Jones Oil site, Readymix site
John Ronan
Johnny Ronan (father), Ashwalk Limited
property at junction Appian Way and Upper Leeson
Street
Pierse Construction Applegreen and Top Oil, Superstop
Consortium, Pierse Building Services, Pierse Contracting,
Pierse Homes, Ged Pierse as Civil Engineering, Building
and Marine Contractors, Norbert OReilly, Shearwater
Developments, Charles Norbert OReilly, Ferghal ONolan,
Kieran Duggan, Martin Murphy, Remayne, Birmayne,
Paddy Kelly and family, Redquartz Boundary, Campshire,
City Quay, City Arts, Eamon Duignan, John McCarthy, Mall
Developments, Pierse Santry Cross, David Hughes Luke
Charleton (receiver, Ernst Young) Bray Town Centre,
(Wicklow), Carrickmines Manor (Glenamuck Road, Dublin),
Collaire Court(Callan, Kilkenny), Eden, Residential
Development(Blackrock, Cork),Gallery Quay
Apartments(Dublin), Marrsfield(Clongriffin), Santry Cross
Hotel and Apartment Development(Dublin),
Shearwater(Kinsale, Co Cork), Silverglen, (Mountmellick,
Co Laois), Swords Central(Dublin), The
Greens(Thomastown, Kilkenny), UCD Student
Accommodation (1800 student bedrooms, Dublin), East
Point Business Park, the Earlsfort Centre, AL Goodbodys
corporate offices, Carton House Hotel and O2 corporate
offices, an extension to Cork University Hospital, the
Department of the Environment headquarters in Wexford,
motorway service stations on the M1 at Castlebellingham
in Co Louth and at Lusk in Co Dublin, and on the M4 at
Enfield, Co Meath, the Dublin Civic Offices, the British
embassy, the Conrad and Carton House hotels and several
buildings in the Dublin Docklands, Clarion Hotel (Dublin),
Project Arts Centre (City Quay, Dublin), Swords central
complex (a mixed retail and commercial development,
north Dublin), former Prem Group Hotel (Santry), Cahill
Printers site (East Wall Road, Dublin)

The Beetham Organisation


Sergei Polonsky, Mirax, BDO
Stoy Hayward (Administrator), Mapfield Properties, No 9
Aldgate One Blackfriars Road (London), Trinity(London
EC3), 301 Deansgate (Manchester), West Tower (Brook
Street, Liverpool), 10 Holloway Circus (Birmingham),
Radisson SAS Hotel(Liverpool), 111 Old Hall
Street(Liverpool), 101 Old Hall Street(Liverpool), Campbell
Square, (Duke Street, Liverpool), Cable House (Cheapside,
Liverpool), Beetham Plaza (25 The Strand, Liverpool)
Jerry Conlon, Gerry Conlon, Gerry ConlanMount Carmel
Medical Group, Dermot ORourke, Harlequin Healthcare,
Niall Donnelly (Chief Executive), Mount Carmel Medical
Group Properties (South Dublin), Anglo Golden Circle,
Quinby Holdings Limited, Mount Carmel Medical (Kilkenny)
Limited, Philip Lynch, Conor Gunne, Richard Godsil, Quinby
Properties, Johnny Ronan, Ickendel Limited
Millennium
Business Park (Kildare), maternity hospital (Rathfarnham),
Aut Even Hospital (Kilkenny), St Josephs Hospital (Sligo), ,
Mount Carmel hospital (Churchtown, Dublin), European
Golf Club (Brittas), 18 apartments at Haddington Road,
Dublin, Bewleys coffee house building (Grafton Street,
Dublin)
Bryan Cullen Precinct Investments Limited, Patrick
Coyle, Gresham Hotel Group PLC, John Delaney and
Stanley Watson
Gresham Hotel (Dublin), Metropole
Hotel (Cork), Park Inn (London), Jurys and Tower hotels
(Ballsbridge)
McCabe Builders
Western Gulf Advisory (WGA), Ashan
Ali Syed, Mary McCabe, John McCabe, Paddy Kelly, John
Walsh, J&M McCabe Properties, Anglo Golden Circle, Maple
10 (Fitzpatrick Tapes), McCabe Builders (Dublin)
Marriott Hotel (Ashbourne), Heritage Centre(Phoenix
Park), Ardmore Hotel (Dublin), Sarasota (Florida), Abington
Estate(Abingdon Estate, Malahide), Chartbusters, site at
Arlington Street (St Jamess, London)
PBN Property Paddy Kearney (Patrick Kearney), Neil
Adair, Brian McConville, Anglo Golden Circle Carryduff
Shopping Centre (Belfast), Clarion Hotel (Carrickfergus),
The Shore (Carrikfergus), shopping centres (Glasgow,
Middlesborough, Eccles), Woodland Manor flats (South
Belfast)
Frankie Whelehan Choice Hotels group, Harry Crosbie,

Paddy Kelly, Peter Cashman, Kasterlee, Carvanna


PropertiesGibson Hotel (Dublin), Clarion hotels (IFSC,
Dublin Airport, Carton House, Liffey Valley), Comfort Inn
(Wiesbaden, Frankfurt, Germany), Comfort Inn (Augsburg,
Germany), Clarion Suites Limerick
Whelan Group Whelan Group (Ennis) Limited, Whelans
Limestone Quarries (Contracts) Limited, Whelans
Limestone Quarries Limited, Whelans Quarries
(Carrigtwohill) Limited and Shannon Explosives Limited,
Carl Dillon (liquidator, Moore Stephens Nathans), Whelans
Asphalt Products Limited, CW Shipping Limited, Staleen
Property Company Ireland Limited, ICC Venture Capital
Partners, Patrick Whelan (founder), Enda Whelan, Brian
Whelan, Uniform Construction Limited, Christina Whelan,
Horwath Bastow Charleton (auditors), John Dixon, Irish
Bitumen Products Limited, WPH (Property) Limited, WPH
(Quarries) Limited, Irish Road Surfacing Equipment
Limited, Keshtem Limited, Whelman Constructors Limited,
Neil Kelly Quarry at Copstown (Mallow, Co Cork), Quarry at
Carrigtwohill (Cork), Quarries in Ennis, lands at Kildysart
(Co Clare), Quarry at Ballyorgan(Limerick), Quarry at
Kilrush (Clare), Quarry at Glanworth (Michelstown, Co
Cork), Quarry at Lecarrow (Roscommon), 14 acres and
house at Caherboy, 11.7 acres and house at Newmarket
on Fergus, 25 acres of forestry at Kildysart, Kildysert
(Clare), 210 acres and house at Cahercon, Land at
Cahercon Pier, Lands at Kilimer, House at Mountpelier
(Limerick), House at Dalys Cross, Dalys Cross
(Roscommon),
Hanly Group Alan Hanly, Albert Hanly (Bert Hanly, Bertie
Hanly), Laragan Developments, Paul McCann(Grant
Thornton, examiner), Laragan Holdings, Sagamu
Developments, McStay Luby (receivers), Hanly Brothers
Limited, Lough Rynn Castle Limited, Clement Gaffney,
Lough Rynn Castle hotel (Leitrim), Kilronan Castle
hotel(Roscommon), Milners Square Milners Square
(Shanowen Road, Santry, north Dublin) 9.6 acres at
Glenamuck Road (Carrickmines, south Dublin),
Carrickmines Green development, Rocky Valley Crescent
estate (Kilmacanogue, Co Wicklow)
Paddy Doyle
Arcadia Developments, Mellview Estates,
Mellview Properties, Mellview Contractors, Lyndonbarry

Properties, Lyndonbarry Estates, Pat McCann( receiver,


Grant Thornton)
land in Athlone, Louth, and Santry in
Dublin.
Paddy Burke Builders Limited, Paddy Burke (Builders)
Limited Michael Nagle (auditor, Ennistymon), Horwath
Bastow Charlton (receiver)
22-unit housing
development in Shannon, pub and to lands at Shannon
airport and at Ballybrit in Galway, the Clare County
Museum, the Burren Art College, the Doolin Hotel, Kilkee
Bay Hotel, commercial projects in counties Clare, Galway,
Tipperary and Limerick, and a number of housing
development projects
Ger ORourke Chieftain Construction, Chieftain City
Campus, Chieftain Developments, Chieftain Construction
Holdings, Chieftain Global (Tripoli, Libya), Sean OSullivan,
Gearoid Costelloe (receiver, Grant Thornton) projects in
Ireland, Britain, the US and South Africa, Coonagh Cross
retail park (Limerick), 17-storey, 50 million hotel
development next to Lime Street train station in central
Liverpool (UK),
projects in Libya, 75 million, 35storey apartment
development in Chicago, Ballyclough (family home, Co
Limerick)
Portlaoise GAA Club Firestone Developments Limited
OMoore Park (Fr Browne Avenue, Portlaoise), Park
Ratheniska
Peter Curistan Anne Curistan (wife), Marian Curistan,
Sheridan Group, Kieran Wallace (receiver, KPMG), Sheridan
Millennium Limited, Marcus Ward Limited, Peter Robinson
(First Minister, Northern Ireland), Dessie Mackin, Peter
Holmes, Quito Developments, Cambourne Investments
(British Virgin Islands), Century City Limited IMAX cinema
(Bournemouth), Parnell Centre (Dublin), Odyssey Pavillion
(East Belfast), Multiplex cinema (Dublin Road, belfast), a
multi-storey car park and three shop units at the Tannery
Building in Belfast city centre.
Patricia Joyce, Thomas Joyce, Tom Joyce Thomas S Joyce
and Sons Limited, Summervill Partnership
Summerville
House, Rosbeg (family home, Westport), 26 houses at a
former church site (lands between Springfield Drive &
Woodpark Avenue, Cloonmonad, Wesport, Co Mayo), 81-99
Kings Road (Chelsea, London)

Terry Devey
Heritage Properties, Andre Wejchert, Gerry
Fagan, Martin Carroll,James McDonnell, Birchford
Investments, Devey Group,Lar Byrne, Guardian
Healthcare, Kieran Wallace (receiver, KPMG) Jameson
Distillery building (Smithfield, Dublin), Smithfield Village
(Smithfield, Dublin), Old Distillery Museum, Chief ONeills
Hotel, Ceol, Grand Canal Dock hotel, 330 apartments on
the site of a former engineering premises on Shanowen
Road, Santry, Dublin 9, Grand Canal Theatre, a chain of
nursing homes in Leinster (four residential care homes in
Louth, Kildare, Meath and Dublin)
John McCann McEnaney Construction, Tom Kavanagh
(receiver, Kavanagh Fennell), Castleway Developments,
Broadway Capital, Jim Osborne
M1 Euro Park, ( 90acre site outside Dundalk), completed projects in
Balbriggan in north Dublin and an unfinished housing
development in Carrickmacross, Co Monaghan,
Crossmaglen, Co Armagh, but is understood to be based in
Switzerland, Xerox Technology Campus in Dundalk, the
Orion Business Park in Blanchardstown in Dublin and a
business park in Co Antrim, Killin Park Golf Club in Dundalk
and a business park in Philadelphia in America, Ropewalk
Shopping Centre ( Warwickshire)
Stephen Harris McEnaney Construction, Tom Kavanagh
(receiver, Kavanagh Fennell), Castleway Developments,
Broadway Capital, Jim Osborne
Twelve Hotel in Barna
(Galway), a share of an undeveloped site in Ennis, Co
Clare, 450 million plan for Mervue, on the outskirts of
Galway, a one-bed apartment close to Rockefeller Plaza in
New York, helicopter from Eddie Irvine, Galway Bay FM
buyout, Fionnuisce estate in Doughiska, Co Galway,
development of apartments at Fionnuisce, Co Galway
Greenband Investments Paul OBrien, Mary Moran,
Kilminchy Holdings, Mount Kennett Investment, M.K.I.
Property Investments, Oyster Developments Limited
Showgrounds Shopping Centre in Clonmel
(Tipperary), Westbury (Corbally, Co Clare), properties on
Sarsfield Street and Patrick Street in Limerick city, the
Grand Central Cinema, a shopping centre in Annacotty,
and five retail units at Castletroy Court
McCormack family Angaton Properties, Alanis Capital,
John McCormack, Breeda McCormack (wife), Alan

McCormack (son), Brian McCormack (son), Niall


McCormack (son), Paddy Kelly, David Arnold, Lar Bradshaw
and Derek Quinlan, Nollaig Partnership, Dermot Gleeson
SC, Marcus Ryan, Patricia Ryan (wife), Parsinna Limited,
Panoramic Investments, Bernard Duffy, TBD property
group, Alanis Limited, International Airport Hotel Limited,
Adelphi Way Developments & Investments Limited,
Frankie Whelehan, Paul Pardy offices of the Revenue
Commissioners(Tallaght), Carton House in Co Kildare, the
Square in Tallaght, Clarion Quay in the IFSC, Dublin and
the Royal Exchange Building in London, Metquarter
shopping centre in Liverpool, Four Seasons Hotel in
Ballsbridge, Dublin, Donnybrook, Dublin (family home),
Monkstown, Co Dublin (family home), Clarion Hotel (Dublin
Airport)
Pat Whelan (Patrick Whelan) Steamboat Developments
Limited, Pat Chesser (Patrick Chesser), Cunningham Walsh
& Associates (auditors), Paul Hanby, Jon Gershinson/Simon
Davidson (receivers, Allsop (Allsops)) , URS Corporation
Limited 16-storey Clarion Hotel in Limerick city
overlooking the river Shannon, property development in
Earls Court (Earls Court, London), Odeon Cinema
(Leicester Square, London)
Richard NesbittMadeleine Nesbitt (wife), Nesbitt
Acquisitions, Arnotts Holdings Limited, Boundary Capital
(Niall McFadden), Anglo Irish Bank, Paladin Capital
Group(Mark Schwartz), Ulster Bank, Paddy Kelly, Keith
Edelman, Michael Nesbitt, Tobias Nanda, Stephen
Haughey, Art Holdings, Arnotts
North Quarter
750m redevelopment of a 5.5-acre block bordered by
Henry Street, Middle Abbey Street, Liffey Street and
OConnell Street
Carey Group PJ Carey Contractors Limited, Joe OHagan,
Carey Group PLC, Seneca Environmental Solutions Limited,
PJ Carey Plant Hire (Oval) Limited Ballymun
regeneration, The Waterfront Lakeview (Wixams, Bedford),
The Oaks (Buckingham Park, Aylesbury), Phoenix
Apartments (Watford), New Aspects (Broughton Gate,
Milton Keynes), Limes Park (Basingstoke), Redhouse Rise
(Priory Vale, Swindon), Ikea Store (Dublin), London 2012
Olympics
North Quay Developments Limited Michael Allen, Declan

Stone, North Quay Property Company Limited Bridgewater


Shopping Centre (Arklow)
Michael Crean Paddy Kelly, Sean Dunleavy, Hugh
McGivern property in Lusk, property in Cashel,property in
Trim
Tom McEvaddy Lorraine McEvaddy (wife), Nexus homes,
Tom McEvaddy Property Company Limited, Nexus
Property, Tom McEvaddy Property Company Ltd (Nexus
Homes), Bront Construction developments at Thornbury
in Barna, Croit na Mara in Salthill and Bramley in
Oranmore, site in Sandyford, Dublin for 51 apartments,
Galway United Football Club
Richard Caring International Clothing Designs 20
Grosvenor Square (London, US Naval Base)
John Lally Lalco, Sova Properties
FAAC
Electronics(Sandyford), Humewood Castle (Wicklow)
Capel Developments
Edward Keegan, Liam Kelly, John
OConnor, Verdon Hall, Natworth, Potquality Investments,
St James Developments Sandford Lodge(Ranelagh),
Rathborne(Ashtown, Dublin), Lyndon (Blackrock),
Dunstaffnage (Stillorgan), Orwell Park(Rathgar),
Hazelbrook Square(Churchtown), Sunday World site
(Terenure),Portmarnock Hotel and Golf links (Portmarnock,
Dublin unrelated to the older Portmarnock Golf Club
members course)
David Kelly
Chris Kelly, RQB (Diswellstown) Limited
property in Castleknock
Chris Kelly
David Kelly, RQB (Malahide) Limited
property in Malahide
Phil Reilly Rockmill, Shannon Homes (Drogheda), Shannon
Homes (Construction)
Southgate shopping centre
(Drogheda)
McAleer and Rushe (McAleer & Rushe) Dunloe Ewart,
Seamus McAleer, Eamonn Laverty (Eamon Laverty,
Eammon Laverty, Eammonn Laverty), Mary Laverty,
Martin Magee, Stephen Surphlis, James Higgins, Keystone
Lintels, Keystone Roof Windows, Jermon Developments,
McAleer & Rushe Construction Limited, McAleer & Rushe
Residential Limited, McAleer & Rushe (Civil Engineering)
Limited, London Road Estates Limited, Lavangna Limited,
Conmurry Developments Limited, Flatmile Limited, College
Court Properties Limited, London Road Apartments

Limited, Louisville Properties Limited, Westland Estates


Limited, Aire Commercials (Leeds) Limited, Aire
Commercials Limited, Albion Inns Limited, Aldergrove
Airport Hotel Limited, Baker Street Investments Limited,
Baker Street Unit Trust, Bedford Street Developments
Limited, BH Commercials (NI) Limited, Bramall
Development Limited, Carnegie Inns Limited, Castlefarm
Properties Limited, Clandeboye Developments Limited,
Collegian Property Limited, Cookstown Developments
Limited, Coolatinney Developments Limited, Dancelane
Limited, Destrina Limited, Drumcairne Properties Limited,
Drum Road Estates Limited, Drum Road Properties Limited,
Flamewall Limited, Fleming Inns Limited, Forest
Commercial Management Limited, Forest Commercial
Limited, Forest Inns Limited, Glandor Limited, Glenastar
Limited, GNT Properties Limited, Kildress Estates Limited,
Timec 1205 LLP, Timec 1208 LLP, Timec 1206 LLP,
Leicester Square Investments Limited, Lowscroft Limited,
M&R Estates Limited, McAleer and Rushe Holdings Limited,
McAleer and Rushe Properties Limited, MRDE Limited, MRP
(Baltic) Limited, MRP (Blackfriars) Limited, MRP
(Bournemouth) Limited, MRP (Finance) Limited, MRP
(Lancefield) Limited, MRP (Portsmouth) Limited,
Mullaghmoyle Developments Limited, Norham House 1138
Limited, Pentonville Properties Limited, Timec 1209 LLP,
Plymouth Inns Limited, Pride Park Inns Limited, St James
Gate Development Limited, Swiss Centre Limited, Taelos
Limited, Termon Developments Limited, Waterfront Inns
Limited, Westland Developments (NI) Limited, Westland
Estates Limited, Westland (Sheffield) Limited, Wilmar
Leisure
2-14 Baker Street, Swiss Centre (London),
Charlotte Place (Southampton), Swiss Centre(Leicester
Square, London), Premier Inn (Gatwick), Millennium Quay
(Gateshead, UK), 10 Portman Square (London W1), 99
Baker Street (London), 46-49 Blackfriars Road (London),
Stanhope Road (Portsmouth), St Pauls (Bournemouth), City
View (Brighton), City Wharf (New Bailey Street,
Manchester), Corporation Street (Ringway, Preston, UK),
Furnival Square (Sheffield), City Square House (Leeds),
Central Park (Leeds), Newgate Centre (Newcastle-uponTyne), Lancefield Quay (Glasgow), Bedford Square (Phase
2, including HQ for Invest Northern Ireland, Belfast),

College Court (Belfast), Corporation Street/Tomb Street


(Belfast), Great Victoria Street (Belfast), Hillsborough Golf
and Country Club (Belfast), Favor Royal Hotel and Golf
Resort, Favour Royal (Co Tyrone), Retail Park (Trim Road,
Navan, Co Meath), Hotel at Newtown Road (Waterford), W
Hotel (Swiss Centre, Leicester Square, London)
Kenny Group (Galway)
Kenny Developments & Co
Limited, Model Investment Partnership, Kenny Business
Parks
John ODolan (decedent) Eileen ODolan (wife)
Galway
City Hostel, Island of Ireland (World development, Dubai),
Island of England (world development, Dubai), apartment
at Centria Condominium (midtown Manhattan)
Brendan Flood Burnley FC Football Club (director), Modus
Corovest, Modus Ventures Limited, Trinity Walk Wakefield
Limited, Modus Properties (Wigan) Limited, Mike
Riddell,Passion for Perfume, Richard Fleming, Brian Green
and Paul Dumbell (joint administrators, KPMG)
Trinity
Walk shopping centre (Wakefield), Houndshill Shopping
Centre (Blackpool), Grand Arcade Shopping Centre
(Wigan)
Belmayne Ireland LimitedDonal Caulfield and Leo
Meenagh, LM Developments, David Hughes (receiver,
Ernst and Young), Vue Three Sixty, Stanley Holdings, Kitara
Limited Belmayne development on the Malahide Road in
Dublin, Silverdale House in Castleknock (family home)
Deerbay Properties Limied
Simon Coyle (receivers,
Mazars), Woodford Developments, Clive Kilmurray, Cove
Capital Partners, Bill Kilmurray, Sonas Centre Limited
(Sonas Consortium), Roy Dixon, Robert White (jeweller),
Norman Turner,
Northwood Business Campus
(Northwood Court, Northwood, Santry, Dublin)
Jim Mansfield Sean Whelan, John Glynn, Anne Mansfield
(wife), PJ Mansfield, Jim Mansfield Jr (son, James
Mansfield/Jimmy Mansfield), Tony Mansfield, HSS planthire,
Citywest Productions Limited, Mansfield Group, BHK
Nominees Limited, Ben Dunne, Ronan Hannigan and
Colman Bermingham, Martin Ferris (receiver), Paddy Reilly,
Dalata Limited, Pat McCann, Park Associated Parke
Associates (Isle of Man), George Maloney (liquidator, Baker
Tilly Ryan Glennon), Dunbeg (Isle of Man), Fanmore (Isle of
Man), Bridford Developments, Landsdowne Francs,

Longborough Aviation Inc Trustee (Wilmington, Delaware,


USA), Fallowvale Limited, Jeffel, Park Associates Ltd
Citywest, Citywest Institute of Education, Citywest
Hotel, Palmerstown House (Kildare), Weston aerodrome,
Finnstown Countryhouse hotel(Lucan), Tassagart House
(Saggart, Dublin, family home), 1993 Cessna Citation
Executive Jet
P Elliot Group Elliott Holdings Limited, Sammon,
Homemakers, Woodskills, Steelskills, AMG Alurage, FCC
Construction SA of Spain, Flag Properties Limited, P Elliot
and Company Limited, Stream Residential Partnership, Ray
Grehan, Glenkerrin Homes, P Elliott and Company
(Northern Ireland) Limited, Allied Irish Bank, Interserve plc
and FCC Elliott, Dewside Limited, Kieran Wallace and
Cormac OConnor (receivers, KPMG)
The Irish Times
old headquarters on DOlier Street in Dublin, Homemakers
store (Dublin Road in Cavan town), St Patricks teacher
training college in Drumcondra, Department of Defence
building in Newbridge, Co Kildare, cute Hospital for the
South West of Northern Ireland, PriorsGate (Tallaght),
Residential Site at Stepaside, Co Dublin, Kilcock
Residential Site, Carrington, Northwood, Santry, Dublin 9,
York Street, Belfast, Mixed Development Site at Pullamore
Far, Cavan, Cavan Retail Park, Lakeland Retail Park, Cavan,
Pullamore Business Park, Cavan, Newcourt Shopping
Centre, Cavan, Townspark Centre, Cavan, Verschoyle
House, Mount Street, Dublin 2, Cookstown Court, Tallaght,
Dublin 24, Units at Ballymount Industrial Estate (Dublin
12), Units at Bray Business Park, Units at Donore Industrial
Estate, Drogheda, Digital Hub Project, Thomas Street,
Dublin 8, Jamestown Road, Affordable Housing Initiative,
Inchicore, Dublin 8, Local Management Services Board,
Ushers Quay, Dublin 8, Herberton Regeneration of
Fatima Mansions Project, Rialto, Dublin 8, Windsor House
office block on Belfasts Bedford Street
Naus Group
Ronan Mellett, Connaught Square Limited,
Neil Mather (administrator, Begbies Traynor), Myles
Crofton hotel, office and retail development at former
Harrison Drape building in Digbeth (Birmingham),
Ashbourne Town Centre (Co Meath), six-acre Barrow Track
(Carlow town, Carlow), 4.5-acre Connaught Square Limited
site in east Birmingham

Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) Declan Collier (CEO), Ray


Gray (Financial Director), Paul Kane (communications
director), Gary McGann (former chairman),Brooklyn
Properties Limited (Bernard McNamara), Gatland Property
Limited (Gerry Gannon), Turckton Developments Limited
(Liam Carroll), Monaer Cork Limited (Liam Carroll) 20-acre
former Parnells GAA club ground close to Dublin Airport,
80 acres south of Dublin Airport including a business park
development, a business park close to Cork Airport
Howard ODonovan/Joe ODonovan Rydell Properties
Limited, Padlake Limited Wilton Shopping Centre (Cork),
ABC Cinema Site (Royal Tunbridge Wells, UK), Capitol
Cinema in the Grand Parade in Cork city centre as well as
a major mixed use development in the suburban village of
Glanmire, Stapleton House, (Oliver Plunkett Street, Cork)
Arnosford Limited Paul Browne, Browne Corporate
Finance Limited, Leoville Limited(lessee), Aiden Murphy
(receiver, Horwath Bastow Charleton), Killerig Hotel
,Killerig Country Club Rentals, Paul McCarthy, Niall Coffey
golf lodges at Kilkea Lodges, Kilkea Castle, Kilkea
(Kildare), Killerig Resort (near Tullow in Co Carlow)
Jim Monahan (James Monahan, James Monaghan)
Mondale Developments Limited, Panimine Limited
Broomfield Court in Shankill (Dublin), Glandore Court
in Monkstown (Dublin)
Rathdrum Properties Limited Ailish Monaghan, James
Monaghan
the development of a 40 bedroom hotel at
Brewery Lane (Rathdrum) , a library, shopping units,
offices and incorporating an existing pub at 22 Market
Square/Main St (Rathdrum), development of 64 homes
including town houses, duplexes and apartments at a site
adjoining Main St (Rathdrum)
Tony Delahunt AS Delahunt Limited
Frederick J Sutton Limited
20 Main Street, Rathdrum
(Wicklow)
Regeneration Developments Limited
Anglo Irish Bank
(50%), Suneil Sharma, Varsity Estates Limited, Sam
Morrison, Gary McDowell, Pat Kearney, Jerry OReilly, David
Courtney Opera Centre (Limerick)
Denis McCoy and John Tierney Faxhill Homes, Michael
Lowry, Ben Dunne, Drumaville consortium
Sunderland
Football Club

P & S Kavanagh (Thomastown) Limited GBC Supermarket


Limited, TD ONeill accountants (Lapps Quay, Cork)
Super Valu Supermarket/garden centre at
Cloghabrody (Dublin Road, Thomastown, Kilkenny)
Alastair Jackson
Eassda Group, Eassda Limited, Botha
Limited, Tarajan Limited, Naviasky Limited, Eassda Ireland
Limited, Keygo Properties Limited Moyvalley Hotel and
golf resort (Kildare), New Forest Golf Club (Westmeath),
Balyna House, Gleann Riada estate (Longford)
Walsh group
Ricky Walsh (founder)
55 units at
Copper Point estate (Air Hill, Schull, Cork)
Neil Durkan
Durkan New Homes Limited, DNH, Harcourt
Terrace Limited, Durkan Ireland, Devondale Limited
Harcourt Terrace Garda Station (Dublin), affordable
housing applicants at Kiltipper, Marlfield, Deerpark,
Rathcoole, Rosse Court, The Belfry and Rath Gael
Sean Kelly
Veronne Kelly (wife), Bolands Mill
Development Company, Versus Limited, Farrell Grant
Sparks (auditors), Benton Property Holdings Marys
Abbey offices (Four Courts, Dublin), 62 Ailesbury Road
(Dublin), offices and hotel (Barrow Street, Dublin), Bolands
Mill (1.73 acre site at Grand Canal Dock, Dublin 4),
Adelaide Square apartment development in Dublin city
centre and The Capel Building office block. It also has
interests in England., Fallapit Estate (Devon, residential
complex boasting luxury homes and grounds in an historic
estate setting)
Bowen
John Bowen, John McStay (liquidator, McStay
Luby), Bowen Construction Limited (UK), Zolfo Cooper
(administrators), Barry Crowley, Don Brockie Cork Airport
Business Park, the Luas extension to Cherrywood, Co
Dublin, and the final section of the M7 motorway.
Jermon Developments
Peter Dolan, Jermon Group,
Jermon Estates, Jermon Limited, Chris Morgan Dumbarton
Town Centre, Fanum House (Belfast), Mezokovesd Airport
(Hungary), site in Czestochowa (Poland), Lahara Retail
Park (Larne), Killymeal House, Ormeau Gasworks (Belfast),
Springhill Shopping Centre in Bangor, the Clarendon
House office block in Belfast, a shop unit at Castle Place in
Belfast and two properties in the centre of Dungannon,
Agusta A109A Mk2 helicopter, Augusta A109A Mk2
helicopter, Northern Irelands first purpose-built Tesco in

Dungannon, Strabane Retail Park


Robert Butler Robert Butler Holdings Limited, Robert
Butler Group Limited, Dooradoyle BT Properties,
Hollowfield Developments, Bluefort Properties, Millgrove
PropertiesAnglo Irish Bank House (Henry Street, Limerick),
properties in the Shannon Free Zone and the National
Technology Park (Limerick), Winterwood at Adare Manor
(family home, Limerick), 15m Hanging Gardens
development at the site of the former GPO on Henry Street
Thompson DevelopmentsThompson Lennox, TB Homes,
Ballybreeze Estates, Redcliff Properties, Sam Thompson
sites in Beragh (Sixmilecross, Tyrone), Ballagh Road
(Fivemiletown, Tyrone), Cooley Road (Sixmilecross,
Omagh, Tyrone), Drumnabreeze House, Magheralin (family
home, Craigavon), Brooke Hall (Loughbrickland, Dromore),
Cambric Court (Hillsborough Road, Dromore)
Moormac Developments Limited
Michael McKenna
(Mike McKenna), Moormac Developments Stake at Tralee
(greyhound racing) The Abbey Tavern public house in
Abbeydorney, St Michaels Green estate and an
undeveloped site in Lixnaw, Killahan (family home,
Abbeydorney, Co. Kerry)
Fergal McAlinden
Lavelle and McAlinden
a partially
built apartment block on the Crumlin Road (Belfast), 57
houses at Dawsons Demesne, Ardee (Louth), development
at Malahide Road (Swords, Co Dublin)
Mervyn McAlister
McAlister Construction Limited,
Sarcon (no.319) Limited 37-storey skyscraper called the
Aurora on Great Victoria Street. (Belfast), sites at at
Greenhall Highway in Coleraine and Dunlady Road in
Dundonald, the Marine hotel (Ballycastle)
Ger Clohessy (Gerard Clohessy)
Frank Fahey, Clohessy
Developments Limited, Clohessy Developments
(Castletroy) Limited, Clohessy Developments (Henry
Street) Limited Mountshannon Road, Annacotty, Lisnagry
(family home), Evanwood Golf Links Road (Castletroy)
Kennedy GroupJ Kennedy and Co Contractors, Kennedy
Crane Hire, Kennedy Concrete Products and J Kennedy and
Company (Manufacturing), Ernst and Young
(administrators), Kennedy Group Holdings, Turnus Ltd,
Dado Developments (Pottingers Quay), Kenry
Developments and Waterside Crescent, BDL Management,

Ramcore Hotels, CUSP, Chris Kennedy, BDL Hotel Group,


Louis Woodcock, Kennedy Investments Ramada Hotel
(Portrush), Bayview Hotel (Portballintrae), 90-bedroom
Express by Holiday Inn to Antrims Junction One retail
park, 169-bedroom Ramada Encore hotel (St Annes
Square development, Belfast), five hotel sites in
Birmingham, Warrington, Ipswich, Glasgow and Hemel
Hempstead
Thomas Hayden, Wayne Hayden, Paul Hayden
Christopher Bennett, Bennett Construction Limited La
Touche Hotel (Greystones, Wicklow)
Ciaran Murdock
Rathdrum Properties Limited (UKregistered), Murdock Nursing Homes and Clyduff, Murdock
Builders Merchants Limited, Frank Nowland (property
receiver, WK Nowlan and Associates)
Highgate Retail
Park (Birmingham),shops in Liverpool and Kent as well as
land in Warrenpoint and Dungannon, land in the
Rathfriland Road area of Banbridge, four nursing homes in
Bradford, Sheffield, Castleford and Osset, chain of building
merchants, the Crescent Link Retail Park (Derry), shopping
centres in England and Scotland
Murnane and OShea Limited Bob Murnane, Denis
OShea, Ballybane Windfarms The Manor (Crawford
Woods, Glanmire, Cork), Maritime Hotel (Bantry, Cork),
Ascot Racecourse Limited
grandstand at Ascot
Racecourse (England)
Lincoln Holdings PLC
Gainsborough film studios
(Islington, north London), , market hall (Uckfield, East
Sussex), German investment property portfolio, Downs
Court ( Meads Street,Eastbourne)
McDaid Developments (Ireland) Limited Peter McDaid
Clooney Terrace (head office, Derry, Londonderry),
developments in Derry, Cavan and Longford,
developments in Donegal
Murphy Construction (Carrigtwohill) Limited John
Coleman, Michael Coleman
42 units at Castleredmond
Court (Midleton, Cork), 16 townhouses at Charleston Close
(Ballinacurra, Midleton, Cork), 18 apartments at
Commissioners Quay (Midleton, Cork), offices for Cork
County Council (Glanmire, Cork), 33 apartments at The
Maltings (Ballinacurra, Midleton, Cork), Glyntown Heights
(Glanmire, Cork), Glyntown Close (Glanmire, Cork),

Sunview Housing Development (Douglas, Cork), Temple


Hill (Cork), Ardcarraig (Ballinglanna, Cork), Orchard
Housing Estate (Glanmire, Cork), Copper Valley (Glanmire,
Cork), Chestnut Meadows (Glanmire, Cork)
Mulgrew Properties Limited
Eddie Mulgrew 33
Ballymacormick Road,Dromore
Donal Mulryan Sean Mulryan (brother), West Properties,
West Logistical Branston Distribution Depot (Burton upon
Trent), Lumiere, a 138-flats development
(Manchester),Skyline, a 20-storey tower with 250 flats
(Manchester), Origin scheme on Princess Street
(Manchester), Renaissance hotel site on Deansgate
(Manchester), Mantos bar (Manchester city centre),
International Cruise Liner Terminal, 251 bedroom hotel,
770 luxury townhouses and apartments, (Greenwich,
London)
Cyril Dennis
Capital and Provident Management, Capital
and Provident Regeneration Le Provenal hotel (Juan-lesPin, French Riviera)
Sean Lyne, Noel Connellan
Packie Vaughan, Domhnall
Slattery, Dominic Considine, Botanic Inns, Lanyon Trading
Limited, Lisk Limited, Frontline Asset Management Limited,
Bernard McNamara,Piran Properties Limited, Tinerana
Limited, John Shee, Joe Hanrahan 84 houses and
apartments at Rosslevan(Tulla Road, Ennis), Loyalty Build,
Fitzpatrick Bunratty Hotel (Clare), Shanaway Road, Ennis
(Connellan family home), Cahercalla More, Golf Links
Road, Ennis (Lyne family home), two sites at Loreto Road,
Lisdarn, Cavan, for the purpose of commercial
development, 33 acres at Gaurus, Ennis, Co Clare and to
acquire an additional 61 acres at Gaurus, Madisons bar
and hotel (Belfast), The Northern Whig bar (Belfast), The
Kings Head bar (Belfast), The Bot bar (Belfast), The Globe
bar (Belfast), Liffey Valley Shopping Centre (Dublin), 270acre Tinerana estate on shores of Lough Derg
Parker Green International
Deputy Bertie Ahern,
Gerard OHare, Ceruzzi former Waterford Crystal 22
acres at Cork Road(Waterford City), The Quays Shopping
and Leisure Complex (Newry), Fairgreen Shopping Centre
(Carlow town), Exchange Street (Waterford), Milford
Crossing Retail park (Connecticut, USA), Trnava Shopping
Park (Slovakia), Sobieski Apartments (Krakow, Poland),

Wielopole Residence Apartments (Krakow, Poland), Tri


Domy Apartments(Prague, Czech Republic), Cerveny
Kopec Apartments(Brno, Czech Republic), Palazzo Dorottya
Apartments(Budapest, Hungary), Royal Residence
Apartments(Budapest, Hungary), Podkolibska
Apartments(Bratislava, Slovakia), Koloseo
Apartments(Bratislava, Slovakia), Sea Dream
Apartments(Varna, Bulgaria), Albert Basin (Newry)
MAR Properties Robin Horner, Scandown LLP, Jewel Group,
Adam Armstrong, Bill Rush (William Rush), Noel Murphy,
Karl Properties, Greenfarm Developments, Donegall Quay,
R&A Developments, NFM Properties, Cedric Blackbourne,
Aaron Blackbourne, Bill Wolsey (William Wolsey), Barney
Eastwood, Castlebawn, Lagmar, Lagan Group, Lagmar
(Barking) 36-48 Argyle Street in Glasgow (TK Maxx),
Vicarage Field Shopping Centre (Barking, east London),
WEN Inns, Portaferry Hotel(Hunters), East Ender(Belfast),
Auld House (Moneyrea), The Esplanade Bar (Bangor), Tipsy
Toad (Lisburn), Hedgehog and Bucket (Belfast), Blackpool
International Airport, Obel tower Obelisk Tower (Belfast),
residential portfolio on Cronwell Road (Belfast), mixed-use
development at Queens Parade (Bangor, County Down),
90 acre (36 ha) mixed-use scheme in Newtownards
(County Down), Savoy Centre (Glasgow), shopping centres
in Glasgow, Barnstaple and Warrington, Carnegie
Ventures, Gibraltar (home to Armstrong)
Towntalk Limited
48-acre St Regis Paper Mill site
(Taplow, Buckinghamshire)
Castlebawn Limited Eastwood Property and R&A
Developments, BJ Eastwood (Barney Eastwood), Adam
Armstrong, William Rush 75-acre site at Newtownards (Co
Down)
Fachtna Crowley Construction Limited
Fachtna Crowley
Berryhill (Castlelyons, Cork), The Riverbank (Bandon,
Cork), Gleann Alainn (Crossbarry), Lissagroom Meadows
(Crossbarry, Cork), Radharc na Spuaice (Ballineen, Cork),
Cois na hAbhainn (Dunmanway, Cork), The Spires
(Inishannon, Cork), Cluain na Croise (Crossbarry, Cork),
Church Hill (Inishannon, Cork), Woodside (Dunderrow,
Cork)
John CuttsParkridge Gate Investments, Matthew Hammond
and Rob Hunt (administrators, of Pricewaterhouse

Coopers), Parkridge Holdings Limited


properties in the
UK,Poland, Portugal and France, Parkridge Retail Park
(Kidderminster Road, Droitwich, Worcestershire)
Ray Madden
The Old Ballroom (Firies, Kerry)
Newlyn Developments
Robert Kehoe, Christy Dowling,
George McGarry, Colm Lundy, John Archbold, Chris
Vaughan Tyrrells Brook (Edenderry, Co Offaly), Cairnbrook
Avenue (Carrickmines, Dublin), Wyvern (Bray, Co
Wicklow), Grand Canal Court (Herberton Bridge, Dublin 8),
St Olaves (Kinsealy, Co Dublin), Newberry (Edenderry, Co
Offaly), Block 10/11 (Montague Lane, Dublin 2), Bray Civic
Centre (Bray, Co Wicklow), Southern Cross Business Park
(Bray, Co Wicklow), Bray Town Centre (Bray, Co Wicklow),
Woodstown (Rathfarnham, Dublin 16), 622 homes at
Kilternan (Co Dublin), Victoria Boulevard (Vilamoura,
Portugal), O Pomar (Portugal), Four Seasons Country Club
(Quinta do Lago, Portugal), Rutland House (Rutland Street,
Leicester, UK)
Dwyer Properties Limited David Dwyer Mariners Cove,
Baltimore, Cork
Marshalsea Property Company Liam OFarrell, Sarah
OFarrell, McDermott family
Naas Shopping Centre
Cordil Construction Limited
Gerry Dillon, Pat Corrigan,
GMP Enterprises, Knocknacarra Investments Limited
Cuirt an Dolain (Fairhill Court, Galway City), Dun
Eibhir (Furbo, Co Galway), Galway West Bus Park (Galway),
Barna Village Centre Apartments (Barna, Galway)
Clerihan Developments Limited
Peleton Developments
Limited WEST City Retail Park (Cork), Poppyfield Retail
Park (Clonmel), Abbey Farm, Innislounacht, Cahir Road,
Clonmel
Magnet Property Investment
9-12 Dingwall Road
(Croydon, UK), 13-16 Dingwall Road (Croydon, UK), t
Georges Central Tower (Blue Building, Leicester, UK),
Carn Properties Limited Seamus McCloy
181 houses
and 32 apartments at Drumnahoagh (Letterkenny, Co
Donegal), 83 Dwelling Units and Crche Abbeytown Road
(Boyle, Roscommon), 12-acre site at Carrickmacross in
County Monaghan, a 33-acre site in Letterkenny, County
Donegal and a nine-acre site in Portglenone (Ballymena,
county Antrim)
Naas Developments John OConnell, Mary OConnell, Grant

Thornton (Paul McCann), Hotel Asset Management


Services, Twangbrook
Osprey Hotel (Naas)
Frank Gormley Paul McCann(Grant Thornton, receiver),
Howard Eurocape, John Kennedy, Peter Kennedy,
Wellington General Partners (WGP), Eurocape, Greg
Coughlan, Howard Holdings, Caulfield McCarthy Group,
Howard Eurocape Ireland, Kingspan co-founder Brendan
Murtagh and Cork businessman Brian Madden, Kieran
Wallace (receiver, KPMG) Spawell Golf and
Leisure(Templeogue),extensive property holdings(South
Africa), apartment complex in the centre of Cape Town, a
regeneration project close to the South African parliament,
and office blocks and shops in Leeds, Polish Project
Wilson Care Group (Wilson Group) Holywood Homes,
Adela Properties, Wilson Developments NI, Greyharbour,
Ballybay Estates
Antrim Road (Belfast, HQ), Lahara
apartment complex (Larne), commercial properties in
Scotland and England,
GP Williams Limited (G.P. Williams Limited)
Tom Keenan
(administrator, Keenan Corporate Finance)
properties
owned by the firm at Church Street in Irvinestown and
Ardvarney Road in Ederney
Parkway Properties
Millfield Shopping Centre
(Balbriggan), Abington residential development (Malahide,
north Dublin)
Gerry Fagan
Oceanico, Simon Burgess Little River Golf
and Resort (North Carolina, USA), dozens of golf resorts in
Portugal, North America and the Azores, Vilamoura in
Portugals Algarve
Devondale Limited Tony Durkan and Brian Durkan (not
related to Durkan New Homes)
Fortunestown Lane,
Saggart, Co Dublin, Bird Avenue, Clonskeagh, Co Dublin,
and Donacumpter, Celbridge, Co Kildare, York Road, Dun
Laoghaire (company address)
Cloonbeg Developers Limited John Cahillane
development at Carragh Lake, Killorglin, Kerry
Banna Holiday Villas Limited
holiday village at
Banna (Clonfert, Kerry)
Philip Danaher MZM Holdings cinema development at
Caherdavin, Ennis Road (Limerick)
Jack Ronan
Vita Cortex, Johnny Ronan (cousin), Sean
McHenry, Vita Cortex Industries Limited, Vita Cortex

Holdings Limited, Vita Fife Five Limited, Brad Holdings


Limited, Castleblake Transport Limited , Danron
Limited , Enfer Scientific Limited , Enfer Technology
Limited , Equine World Tty Limited , Giro Properties
Limited , Glenfurrow Company (Isle of Man) , Glenfurow
company (New Zealand) , Louis Ronan & Co Limited ,
Meat Proteins (Ireland) , Mega Save Investments Limited ,
Mocklerstown Holdings Limited , National By Products ,
Nicklewise Investments Limited , Nutrigrow Limited , PIC
Ireland Limited , PIC Ireland GTC Limited , Print Works
Limited , Rennard Pig Farms Limited , Robinwave
Limited , Ron Pro Limited , Ronan Technologies Limited ,
Tarb By Products Limited , Tipperary Raceway Limited ,
Vita Five Five Limited , Web Circle Limited , Wee Care
Limited Sherkin Penthouse (Lancaster Gate, Cork)
McGinnis group
Monnaboy Limited, Edenreagh
Developments, John McGinnis (JC McGinnis, John Charles
McGinnis), P McGinnis, P Brady, A McGinnis, Henley
Enterprises Limited, Northwin Holdings (Wellington)
Limited, Gortree Developments Limited, Templemoyle
Homes Limited, Templemoyle 2004 Limited, Twolochs LLP,
Dermont Developments Limited, McGinnis Stockton
(Estate Management) Limited, Eglington Investments
Limited, Meadowbank Limited, Uladh Properties Limited,
Caw Properties Limited, Eglington Properties Limited, Red
Sails Developments Limited, Abercom Developments and
Leisure (1990) Limited, McGinnis Manor Row Limited,
Rumex Trading Limited, Mournview Properties Limited,
Dermont No 1 LLP, Dermont No 2 LLP, Dermont No 3 LLP,
Dermont No 4 LLP, Binevenagh Properties Limited,
Wellington Square (Annadale Embankment, south
Belfast), Coopers Mill (Dundonald, Co Down), Bracken Hill
(Castlereagh, Belfast), 10.5 acres at Blaris Road (Lisburn,
Co Antrim) and 35 acres in Inverness (Scotland), Campsie
Business Park (company address, McLean Road, Eglington,
Londonderry)
Brendan Murtagh
Howard Holdings, Kingspan, Alan
Murtagh, Greg Coughlan, Brian Madden, Stephen Webster,
Loparco, Howard Property Ireland, Jason Clerkin, PFK
OConnor, Leddy and Holmes (auditors), Clowater Asset
Management, Maulbawn Holdings Limited
KARMELICKA
STREET, KRAKOW, POLAND, SAN BASILIO, ROME, ITALY,

REZYDENCJA WILCZAK, POZNAN, POLAND, BROWAR


KOBYLEPOLE, POZNAN, POLAND, SZCZECIN WATERSIDE,
SCZCECIN, POLAND, TORUN RETAIL PARK, TORUN,
POLAND, VALLDEMOSSA RESORT, MALLORCA, SPAIN,
ESTUARY COURT & MEWS, ROCHESTOWN ROAD, CORK,
HAVISHAM HOUSE, ROCHESTOWN ROAD, CORK, ANGLO
BUILDING, ANGLESEA STREET, CORK, MAIDSTONE
BUILDINGS, LONDON, EYRECOURT, ROCHESTOWN, CORK,
MARINA PLACE, HAMPTON WICK, CITY QUARTER, LAPPS
QUAY, CORK, TRINITY GATE, GUILDFORD, CORK
WEBWORKS, CORK, NEW GOLBE WALK, LONDON, THE
CLARION HOTEL, CORK CITY, 1bn Cork docklands
development, land at Passage West (Cork)
Whitgift Foundation
Whitgift shopping centre
(Croydon, UK)
Cleary Doyle Trinity Hire Wexford, Trinity Hire Gorey,
Trinity Hire Arklow, Wexford Block Limited, John Doyle,
Eugene Cleary Glaunsharoon Apartments (Elington Road,
Wexford), Clonard Village (Wexford), Clonattin Village
(Gorey, Co. Wexford), Avoca Wood (Avoca, Wexford),
Village Gate (Ballycanew, Co. Wexford), Glencove
(Courtown, Co. Wexford), The Ramblings (Piercestown, Co.
Wexford), The Gallops (Naas, Co. Kildare), ESB
headquarters (Garrycastle, Athlone, Co. Westmeath),
Wexford Retail Park, Bakers Yard, Portland St. Dublin 1,
Larkins Cross (company address, Wexford)
Eaglemount Properties Snoddons group, Snoddons Blaris
(NI), Westfield,Michael Gutman, Samuel Harris, Peter
Miller, Brian Snoddon, leon Shelley, The Sprucefield Centre
Limited Sprucefield Park shopping centre (Lisburn)
Frank Boyd
Rose Boyd (wife), William Ewart, Killultagh
Estates,Castle Glen Development Company Connswater
shopping centre (east Belfast), McKinstry Road shopping
centre (Lisburn, Antrim)
Michael Whelan
Moritz Group, Maplewood Homes,
Maplewood Developments, MW Homes, Seskin, Moritz
Elliot, Moritz Commercial, Moritz Mivan, Victoria SRL, Lunar
Sea Holdings (UK) Limited, Kristmannson Properties BFT,
Digiweb, PH Ross, TJ OMahony, Commons Hardware, Paul
McCann (Grant Thornton, receiver), Digiweb, Wickes DIY,
St Endas GAA Club, Glintstone Limited, Rumbold Builders
Limited Galway Gateway (Knocknacarra, Galway),

Newcastle (Dublin), sites purchased are all in major urban


centres around Burcharest and regional cities (Romania),
Ballycullen(Dublin), Hazelhatch Park(Celbridge, Co.
Kildare), Hazelwood(Celbridge, Co Kildare), Herberton
(Dublin), Newcastle Lyons(Newcastle, Co Dublin), The
Paddocks(Adamstown, Co Dublin), 70 Gracechurch Street
(London), Temple Road (family home, Dartry, Dublin 9)
PJ Walls Finance and Property Ltd, Shaun Green (Finance
Director), PAV Consulting Services Ltd, Patrick Veale
(former group director), Liam Walls (chairman), Neilcott
Construction, PJ Walls Group Holdings Limited, Walls
Developments, Willie White, Shaun Greene (finance
director) O2 Arena (Dublin), Pier C at Dublin Airport,
Trinity Colleges Biosciences building, the Cliff House Hotel
(Ardmore, Co Waterford), Iontas building at NUI Maynooth,
Northern Cross development (Malahide, north Dublin),
Hilton hotel (Northern Cross, Malahide)
Fider Homes
developments in Omagh (Co Tyrone)
and Dunmurry (Co Antrim)
Ciaran Haughey
Laura Haughey (nee Laura Daly, wife),
Medeva Properties Limited, John Barnicle, Celtic
Helicopters, Larchfield Securities, Des Traynor, Guinness &
Mahon Limited and Ansbacher Limited, Mike Murphy
Insurance Brokers the island of Inishvickillaune off the
Kerry coast as well as seaside properties in Co. Wexford,
land and aircraft hangers at the Celtic Helicopters
headquarters in Knocksedan near Dublin Airport, Kinsealy
(family home, Co. Dublin), , apartment in Grand Madison
building, Fifth Avenue apartment in New York.
Deerland Construction
John Paul Construction, Holtglen
Limited Ferrybank Shopping Centre (south Kilkenny,
county Kilkenny)
Sean Reilly
Alcove Developments, McGarrell Reilly
Homes,McGarrell Reilly Developments, Alcove Spitaler,
Anglo Golden Circle, Maple 10 (Fitzpatrick Tapes)
Watermarque Building (Dublin), Cisco Building (East
Point Business Park), land at Maynooth (Kildare),
Spitalerhof retail and office building (Hamburg, Germany).
Site om Dundalk, site in Ratoath (Meath), Marlmount (Old
Dublin Road, Dundalk, County Louth)
Glydee Developments
Paybody Properties Limited,
Keelagh Homes Limited, Mullagharlin Limited, Gerard

Burns, Claire WidgerCarlin Hall


(Mullagharlin/Mullagharlinn, Dundalk, county Louth),
Christendom Avenue (Ferrybank, county Kilkenny)
Stanley Holdings
Kitara
Belmayne development on
the Malahide Road in Dublin
Albion Enterprises Limited
Belmont Hall in
Gardiner Street and Temple Hall in Parnell Street, as well
as Heath Square in Dublin 11, SHREWBURY Lodge
(Cabinteely Village, Dublin), Heath Square (Finglas, Dublin
11), Dalymount Park (Bohemians FC, Dublin)
Michael Walsh
site at Mount Sion Road, Ballyrobin
near the Waterford Golf Club falls within the Ferrybank
Belview Local Area Plan
Michael Ryan Killegland Developments Limited, MR Film
Productions Limited, Dauphin 2 Aviation Limited
Barrack Construction Limited Paul Byrne
Liffey Hall
(Newbridge, Kildare)
Park Avalon Developments Limited John Halpin, Patrick
Halpin
Ashburton Construction Limited
P A Bello Limited,
Conal Byrne, Kevin McNulty
de Vesci Hill development
(Abbeyleix, Laois), Boyne Bridge Business Park (Drogheda,
Co Louth), a 42-house development in Collon, County
Louth
John Shee, Joe Hanrahan Mowlam Healthcare, Wadlow
Limited, Cracken Properties Limited, Megcourt
Developments, Paland Developments, Dr Paschal Carmody
and his wife, Dr Frieda Keane Carmody 70-acre Tinerana
Estate, 22 holiday homes in Ballyvaughan (county Clare)
Argyle Street Properties (No 2) Limited Progress Property
Developments Limited
2014 Commonwealth Games
Hotel (Glasgow), Jumeirah Hotel (Glasgow), development
at Argyle Street/Robertson Street (Glasgow)
Kemberton Properties
John ODolan (decedent), Eugene
Hyland, Sean Hynes, Joe Hynes (Joseph Hynes), John
OConnor, Eoin Ryan (receiver, Horwath Bastow Charleton)
221 houses and two apartments on the site at Glen
Road (Tramore, Waterford), sites Avonmore and Cooney at
the Island (Clonmel, county Tipperary)
Chris Crehan, Margaret Crehan
Kapstone Limited,
Coolagh Construction Limited and Inchagoill Contractors
(Salthill) Limited, Strinler Limited, Knocknacarra

Investments LimitedGort na Ri, Drom Oir, Letteragh Road,


Sli Gheal, Linn Bhui, Ashleigh Grove, Knocknacarra Park,
Hassets Field, Limerick, Sliabh Ard, Gort Siar, Carrigeen
Portacarron, Caiseal Ur, Gort Siar Apartments, Cluain Dara,
The Rise, Cloch Ard Clybaun Road Hotel, Cluain Mhor,
Windfield Gardens, Gleann na Tra, An Logan
Thomas OReilly, James Staunton, Peter Staunton, Patrick
Staunton, Ita Staunton, John Staunton and Joan Rowland
Michael Cannon, Cathal Cannon
KE Kavel, Owen Kirk,
two sites on either side of the Friedrichstrasse (Berlin,
Germany)
Risk Capital
Greyhound Racing Association (GRA), Luke
Johnson, Wimbledon Stadium (Greyhoound racing
stadium, 12.5-acre site next to the former Wimbledon FC
base)
Turnstile Developments John Hansen and Stuart Irwin
(receivers, KPMG), Paul Neill, Kilbright Development
Clandeboye Retail Park (Bangor) and Toscana Retail
Park (Bangor), Hawker 400xp and Hawker 850xp aircraft,
sites in Belfast city centre and Hillsborough in County
Down
Bill Doyle, Fergus OBrien Bohan Property Consultants,
Doyle Developments, Bohan Estates
Fairgreen
development (Mountmellick Road, Portlaoise), Barrington
Tower (Brennanstown Road,Blackrock, Dublin), 1.5 billion
development near Drogheda
Gwynne Thomas
Thomas Thompson Holdings (TTH),
Kathryn Thomas (daughter)
Carlow Shopping Centre
(county Carlow)
Newell Construction Limited Patrick Newell, Marian
Newell (wife) residential developments in Tuam (county
Galway) and Headford (county Galway)
Tony Fitzpatrick (Anthony Fitzpatrick), Patrick Fitzpatrick
Paddy Fitzpatrick (father), Paddy Shovlin, JHB Limited,
Simon Coyle (receiver, Mazars)
Jacks Hole (Brittas
Bay, county Wicklow), Beacon South Quarter (Dublin)
Ellen Construction Michael Doran, Martin Doran, Kieran
Wallace (receiver, KPMG), Martin Ferris (receiver, Ferris
and Associates)
Bewleys hotels in Dublin, apartment
developments in Dublin and Wexford, Bewleys Hotel at
Dublin Airport, Bewleys Hotel in Leopardstown (Dublin),
holiday home scheme in Wexford, apartment complex on

the East Wall Road in Dublin, Island Key apartment


development on Dublins northside
Shipton Group Kieran Wallace and David Swinburne
(receivers, KPMG), Douglas Developments Limited, Neil
Love, Clayton Love, Eamon Leonard, Sarah Cronin
Douglas Court Shopping Centre (Cork),Douglas
Village and Blackpool Shopping Centres
NOT FLAGGED FOR NAMA
Abbey PLC
M&J Engineers Limited, Kingscroft
Developments Limited, Abbey sro (Prague), M&J Hire,
Charles Gallagher, Gallagher Holdings Limited, FMR LLC
Castlelea(Portarlington),Clonroosk Abbey (Portlaoise),
The Hastings (Balbriggan), Holywell (Kilcoole, Wicklow),
Castlegate(Portarlington), Somerville(Ratoath Village)
John Glynn
Clayton hotel (Galway)
Paul Coulson Lars Bradshaw, Sean Fitzgerald, Anglo,
Ardagh Glass PLC, South Wharf PLC, JC Flowers Private
Equity II Fund, Anglo Irish JCF 1 LLP Sandyford
development, Irish Glass Bottle site
Balcuik
Tysan Investments, Sean Fitzpatrick, Lars
Bradshaw, Sean Melly, Paul Coulson, Lachlann Quinn
(ESB), Pat Gunne, Gary McGann, Denis OBrien, Pat
Doherty, John Kerry Keane
Atrium (Sandyford)
Sean Fitzpatrick
Anglo, Triona Fitzpatrick (wife), Sarah
Fitzpatrick (daughter), Jonathan Fitzpatrick (son), David
Fitzpatrick (son), Derek Quinlan, Paddy Shovlin, Richard
Gunne, Andrew Gunne, Ronan OCaoimh (Trinity Biotech),
Gowan Securities (Michael Dwan), Michael Maughan,
Cormac McAlinden, Deirdre Foley (D2 Private), Brooklawn
Property Holding Limited, David Arnold (D2 Private),
George Crampton, John Crampton, SCI Saint Roch, Angela
Cavendish,JC Flowers Private Equity II Fund, Anglo Irish JCF
1 LLP , Claret Capital (Domhnal Slattery), NCB, Davy,
Bloxham, Goldman Sachs, Warren Private Clients, Golf
Central Europe KFT, Fintan Drury, Brian Davy, Bertie
Ahern, Ekeh Oil and Gas, Chris Lehane (Official Assignee),
Joyce OConnor (sister) Bank of Ireland Baggott Street
HQ, Brooklawn House (Shelbourne Road), Graham
OSullivan Coffee Shop (now Carluccios, Duke Street,
Dawson Street), apartment (Custom House Square),
Kelston Development (apartment, Foxrock), Killiney Court
development (apartment, Killiney), Glenhilton

development (two apartments, Bray), London apartment


rented to Anglo, Avenue Bellevue (Saint Jean Cap Ferrat,
St Jean Cap Ferrat), oilfield (Nigeria), villa (Marbella),
property(LOng Island, new York), property (Germany,
Poland), Pilismarot Village golf complex (Hungary),
apartment at Smithfield Market (Dublin)
Bracklagh Construction Limited
Michael Roper Ceol na
Mara (Sligo)
Fairlee Properties
Jerry Beades, Jerry Beades Concrete,
Kieran Wallace (KPMG, receiver), Fianna Fail 158-163
Richmond Road(Dublin), Unit 6, Tivoli Centre, Richmond
Road Industrial Estate, Dublin
Larionovo Ray Norton, Helen Norton, Andrew Brett, Barry
Hennessy Dubai Sports City Complex, properties in the
UAE, Morocco, India, Portugal, Hungary, France and Spain
Dorville HomesGerry Haughey, OMalley Construction
Wyckham Point (Dundrum), Adelphi House (Dun
Laoghaire), Wyckham Way(Dundrum),
Southmede(Dundrum), Lakehurst(Waterville,
Blanchardstown), Cranmer Place (Haddington Road,
Dublin), Marlay View (Ballinteer Avenue), De Vesci House
(Monkstown),Cannon Place(Sandymount), St Johns
Gate(Clondalkin), Liberty Court(Lower Clanbrassil Street),
New Row Place(Dublin 8), St. Peters Square (Phibsboro),
Cairn Hill(Foxrock), St. Johns Park Avenue(Sandymount)
Brian OFarrell N1 Property Developments, OFarrell Cleare
auctioneers, David Drumm, Headland Property Holdings,
Anglo Golden Circle, Maple 10 (Fitzpatrick Tapes)
Northside Shopping Centre (Coolock), Malahide Boat
Yard
Gerry McGuire Parolen Group (Holdings), Parolen, Anglo
Golden Circle, Maple 10 (Fitzpatrick Tapes)
Laurence
Town Centre (Drogheda)
Michael Herbert
Lebreh, Herbel Restaurants, Lesley
Herbert(wife), Lesley Estates, Donegall Place Investments,
Pat McCormack, Merset, Frank Boyd, Andrew Creighton,
William Ewart Properties, Donegall Place Investment
Limited, Bow Street Mall Limited, Central (Lisburn) Limited,
Merset Properties Limited, Dermont Developments
Limited, St James Centre Limited, Beechdale Properties
Limited, Edenreagh Limited (former McGinnis
Developments Limited), P McCormack, Herbel Restaurants

Limited, Craven Court Centre Limited, Herbel (Eastern)


Limited, Birchsilver Limited, CB Beatty, Lesley Estates
Limited, Herbel Estates (Ireland) Limited, Montgomery
Management Limited, Lesley Balmoral Limited, Lesley
Restaurants (Ireland) Limited, Lesley Place, L Herbert and
Son Limited, Treetops Securities Limited, Flagship Centre
Limited, Lemon Quay (One) Limited, The Herbel Pension
Scheme, KFC restaurants, Green Lanes Shopping
Centre(Devon), Flagship shopping centre (Bangor),
Duncrue Service Centre(Belfast), Loreburn Shopping
centre (Dumfries),Crossgates Shopping Centre (Leeds),
Park View Shopping Centre (Tyne and Wear), Bow Street
mall (Lisburn), Bloomfield Shopping Centre (Bangor),
William Ewart Properties Nick Reid, Frank Boyd, Andrew
Creighton Victoria Place shopping centre(London), Fulham
Broadway shopping centre (Fulham, London),
Hammersmith Broadway shopping centre (Hammersmith,
London), Gyle Shopping Centre (Edinburgh), 40shopHart(Fleet), 2 Lanyon Place (Belfast), 8 Lanyon
Place(Belfast), Victoria Square Complex (Belfast), Royal
Exchange scheme (Belfast),
Irish Nationwide Building Society
Pangrove Limited,
Vernia Limited, Cedarclose, Armoin, Landor (Dundee
Wharf), Ballmore Ontario Dundee Wharf (London)
James Clancy (Jimmy Clancy, Jim Clancy) Clanview
Construction, Tariq Mohammed, M2 (Emmedue), Insulated
Concrete Formwork, Gerrard F May, Gerrard May, Gerry
May, Clantek Future Building Systems Limited, BDO
Simpson Xavier (Receiver, Paul Keenan), Bad Arann
Teoranta, Phoenix Developments, Aran Islands Direct, Elite
Holding Group, Sarah Clancy (wife), Clan Electrics Limited,
Blue Line Chemicals, Stephen Graham, Tony Woods
Oscars Restaurant (Dominick Street Galway), Clan
Video Shop (Dominick Street, Galway), Eagle Rock
(Spiddal), Botley land (Portarlington), Riverside Estate
(Kilmalogue, Portarlington), 11 portfolios of land (Galway),
Polystyrene machine (Abu Dhabi), Clan Eagle 1(ferry), Clan
na nOileain (ferry), factory (Romania), Ceol na Mara (Bed
and Breakfast/Restaurant, Spiddal), Knocknagreine
House(Furbo, Connemara), Clan House (Dominic Street,
Galway)
John OConnor
Esso Station (Tallaght), properties and

sites in Sweden, Brussels, Nice, Portugal, Dublin, Meath,


Wicklow and Wexford
Moortrim Limited
Peter Coulston Sadlers Hall (Saddlers
Hall, Kill)
Pascal Conroy Bohemians, Dalymount Park
Phibsborough Shopping Centre
Deputy Frank Fahey Fahey Higgins LLC (Boston), Noel
Harrington, Ger Clohessy, Ethelle Fahey(wife), Sage
Construction Limited, BEF Developments Limited, Kinnicha
Grove Management Company Limited, 2 apartments
Castlerea(Roscommon), Apartment 8a, 16 Eglinton Court
(Galway), house at Kilbeacanty (Gort), apartment at Dun
Aengus, New Docks (Galway), house at Dun na Coirbe
(Galway), house at Rinawade Close (Leixlip), shareholding
I n apartment at Dun na Coirbe(Galway), family owned
properties Moydrum (Athlone), shareholding in 4
apartments and shop, Lower Gerald Street (Limerick),
shareholding in retail unit, 2 offices and warehouse Crowe
Street (Gort), house at Jumeirah Estates(Dubai), house at
the Grove, Crowe Street (Gort), shareholding in apartment
at Tappen Street, Boston (USA), 5 apartments owned in
partnership at Rue Paul-Emile Janson 1000 Brussells, 10
apartments owned in partnership at Rue du Sceptre, 1015
Brussells, apartment at Cathedral Place (Limerick), house
at Villafranche(France), property at Port de Mos, property
at Alcantarillha (Portugal), apartment at Irishtown (Dublin),
hair salon business (Moscow), 4 Carraig Ban, Menlo,
Galway (family home)
Nigel McKenna Lighter Quay Hotel Management
Westin
Hotel (Auckland, NZ)
Jackie Gallagher
Gallan Group, JJ Gallagher
UK
developments (Birmingham, Peterborough)
Mayeco Properties Limited
Liam Maye(deceased), Anne
Maye(widow), Dawn Maye(daughter), Christy
Maye(brother), Bernard Somers, Bernard Costello (Bernard
Costelloe), Castlethorn Construction, Depton Limited, Joe
OReilly, John Fitzsimons, Sweepstake development
(Ballsbridge), St Jamess (England), apartment at Dock Mill
(Barrow Street, Dublin), apartment at The
Phillimore( London), Villa Dom Perignon(France),
Whitethorn estate (Palmerstown), Holmwood (Cabinteely),
Avoca Park (off Avoca Avenue, Blackrock), Beaumont

Woods (Dublin), Carysfort College Carysfort Park


(Blackrock), 7,000 acres of zoned housing land in the
Dublin area, Riverwood, Fernleigh and Woodbrook
(Castleknock), Stationcourt (Coolmine), Ivy Court and
Beaumont Woods (Beaumont)
, Dundrum Town Centre, Woodbrook (Shankill), Weavers
Hall(family home, Plunkett Avenue, Westminster Road,
Dublin 18)
Prem Group
Arago Investments, Peter Reddan, Gerard
McNulty, Premier Hotels Limited
hotels Ireland, Britain,
Belgium and France, hotels (Kilkenny, Leeson Street, Park
West and Sandyford, Harcourt Street), Days Hotel(Dublin
Airport)
Conway Partnership Michael Conway (Senior), Michael
Conway (Junior), Kieran Conway, Paudie Dennehy, Rumex
Ltd, Daphne Investments Ltd(trading as Dee Partnership),
Kieran Wallace (receiver, KPMG)
Dennehys Cross
(Cork), Castletreasure (Douglas, Cork), City
Square(Watercourse Road,Cork), Grand Parade
Plaza(Grand Parade, Cork), additional properties adjacent
to the Grand Parade site
John Magnier and JP McManus Sue Magnier(wife), Noreen
McManus (wife), Vincent OBrien(father-in-law), Mitchells
and Butlers, Sloane Capital, Lydian Capital, Denis Brosnan
(Kerry Group) Unilevers HQ(Victoria Embankment,
London), Manchester United, Martinstown Stud farm
(Limerick), Sandy Lane Hotel(Barbados), Coolmore
Stud(Fethard, Tipperary), Ralph Lauren Store (Manhattan),
Jurys Hotel (Dublin)
Dermot Desmond Robert Sangster, Neovia, IIU
Nominees, Betdaq, Daon, Baltimore Technologies, Esat
Telecom, Barchester nursing homes, Bottins Investments,
International Investment & Underwriting (IIU), Chronicle
Bookmakers, Carty family
London City Airport, Sandy
Lane Hotel(Barbados), Barchester nursing homes,
Rietumu Banka
Astondale Properties Limited Michael Murphy,
Chartbusters, South Dublin Construction, Kieran
Wallace(receiver, KPMG) Chartbusters Store(Christ
Church, Dublin), sizeable land bank, Parkgate Business
Centre (Phoenix Park, Dublin)
John Sweeney Tom Kavanagh (Kavanagh Fennell

Partnership, receiver), Blackshore Holding Group, Black


Shore Holdings, Meath tax investors, Kantaka, Shelbourne
Holdings group, Bernard McNamara, Bernard Doyle, David
Courtney, James Luby (receiver, McStay Luby)Johnstown
House Hotel & Spa(Enfield), Shelbourne Hotel, Courtyard
Marriott, services stations and convenience stores
(Galway)
Flash Developments Ciaran Maguire, Ciaran Maguire
Group, Kieran Wallace (liquidator, KPMG) Palm View
resort(Boa Vista, Cape Verde)
Cornelius Ryan (Con Ryan),Kathleen Seret-Ryan
Declan
Taite (Farrell Grant Sparks, FGS, receiver)
Kinnitty
Castle hotel(Offaly)
Fordmount Property Group Limited Billy ORiordan (PwC,
Pricewaterhouse Coopers, receiver), Michael Daly,
Fordmount Developments Limited and Fordmount
Developments (Savoy) Limited,Fordmount Investments
Limited, Fordmount Retirement Villages Limited, Adrian
Frawley (Dermot G ODonovan Partners), Willie ODea
Savoy hotel(Limerick), Riverpoint(Limerick), Bedford
Row(Limerick)
Michael Costello
Kieran Wallace (KPMG, receiver),
Racket Hall Trading Racket Hall hotel(Roscrea), Bank bar
and Rogue Traders restaurant(Limerick)
Balmaford
Kieran Walshe (KPMG, receiver), Martin
Naughten (Glen Dimplex), David Shubotham Whites
Hotel Whites Hotel (Wexford town)
Freestand Kieran Wallace (KPMG, receiver), Noel ODywer,
Michael Gilmore
GPO Nightclub(Galway)
Tweedy Group Bob Tweedy, Eylewood, Woodman,
Cherryfox Taverns, Ulysses Taverns, Frank
Wallace(liquidator) Muldoons Bar (Waterford), Peigs Bar,
Oxygen nightclub, Park Inn and Bad Bobs(Lismore Park),
Oscars bar and restaurant, (Dunmore Road) Woodman
bar(John Street), Rubys lounge and club(John Street),
Masons(Manor Street), Ulysses and Ten nightclub(John
Street)
Capital Bars Group Liam ODwyer (brother), Des
ODwyer(brother), Pearse Farrell (Farrell Grant Sparts,FGS,
receiver), Kieran Wallace(KPMG, receiver), Toji Holdings
Limited, Cathal Jackson(owner of the Copper Face Jacks
nightclub, Harcourt Street), Mataking,
Cafe en Seine

(Dublin), Howl at the Moon(Dublin), Zanzibar (Dublin), the


George(Dublin), Break for the Border (Dublin), Dragon
(Dublin) the Grafton Capital hotel (Dublin) and Trinity
Capital hotel (Dublin)
Tom Keane (Thomas Keane)
Kieran Wallace (KPMG,
receiver), John McStay(McStay Luby, receiver), Killenard
Golf Company,Seinfield Holdings, TK Contract Systems
Limited, Corrigeen Construction Company Limited, KeaLwe Ltd, Killenard Golf Company Limited Killenard and
Heritage Golf Hotel and Spa (Laois), Corrigeen(family
home,Stradbally, Co Laois)
Kelcar Developments
Billy ORiordan (PwC,
Pricewaterhouse Coopers, receiver) Blarney Golf Resort
Bennett Developments Chris Bennett, Jewelbury, Deputy
Sean Power
Merchants Yard(East Wall Road, Dublin)
Lynch Hotels Michael Lynch, Michael B Lynch, Declan
McDonald (receiver, Pricewaterhouse Coopers)
Green
Isle Hotel (Clondalkin), Clare Inn Hotel (Dromoland, Clare),
and Breaffy House Resort (Castlebar, Mayo), West County
Hotel (Ennis, Clare)
Michael Kearney
Airport Road hotel
Aiddon Limited
Golf and hotel complex at Fruitfarm
(Kilsallaghan)
Spectrum Developments Limited
PJ Walls City Junction
business park(Balgriffin), Trinity Central (Pearse Street,
Dublin 2)
Yair Levy YL Real Estate, Anglo, Kent Swig, Related Cos
230 apartments at Battery Park City(225 Rector
Place, Manhattan, USA)
Larry Goodman
Reverie, Ven Air, Warren Private
Clients, Blackrock Hospital Group, the Hermitage Clinic
and Galway Clinic, Laurence Jr Goodman (son), C&D
Foods, Irish Food Processors (IFP), Anglo Irish Beef
Processors (AIBP), Salus beef facility (Pniewy) Setanta
Centre(Nassau Street), building at Harcourt Road(Dublin),
hangar next to Dublin Airport, 1 x Falcon EX2000 aircraft,
Goldman Sachs headquarters building in London, Earl of
Kildare hotel (Dublin), hotel-and-golf-course development
on a 950-acre site they own near Dundalk, Co Louth, 25
acres of land at the former meat-processing plant at
Ravensdale, 58-acre site near Waterford city, mixed-use
scheme on a five-acre site (Clonmel)

John Byrne
Alstead Securities, Carlisle Trust, Dublin
City Estates, Tristan Settlement and the Prospect
Settlement
Kings Building (Smithfield, Dublin 7),
DOlier Street House, offices on Parnell Square
Tom Jones, Deirdre Jones
OMalley Construction
Frank OMalley, Jason OMalley,
Myles OMalley, Shelbourne House Partnership, OMalley
Homes and Development Limited Shelbourne
House(Ballsbridge), Proby Square(Blackrock), former
Chester Beatty Library site(20 Shrewsbury Road, Dublin),
7,000 residential units in Galway, Carlton Mews(family
homes)
James Ring, Gerry OConnor
Athlumney(Navan)
Lochlann Quinn (Loughlann Quinn) Glen Dimplex, Martin
Naughton 85-93 Mount Street(Dublin), Atrium
Building(Sandyford), Citigroup HQ(IFSC), Merrion
Hotel(Dublin)
Austin Kelly
Hollybrook Construction 2-3 Parnell
Street(Dublin), 29 houses on Enaville Avenue and St
Patricks Avenue (North Strand, Dublin)
John ONeill, Patricia Ward
Pecan Properties, Bernard
McNamara, David Courtney, Bernard Doyle
Garda
Building(Harcourt Street)
Damien Tansey
Apollo House(Tara Street)
Sean Carew
Harbour House(Clonmel)
Denis OFlynn, Daniel OFlynn
Irish Life House(South
Mall, Cork)
Matt Gallagher Earlsfort Centre Developments, Ravenshall
developments, Construction Industry Federation (CIF)
67-72 Lower Mount Street(Dublin), East Point
Business Park(Dublin)
Patrick Rocca Accorp
Holbrook House(Holles Street),
Argos distribution centre(Bedford, UK)
David Flynn
D Flynn Properties properties in Waterford
MPS Global
Jas Kalsi, Myles Kirby (Ferris and
Associates, liquidator), Ennis Chamber of Commerce,
Muldowney Property Services, Muldowney Group, Avanti
Holding(Dubai), Firm assist, IDP Invest condominium
developments in New York and Chicago, Banksko/ Bansko
(Bulgaria), UAE, 166 Lower Rathmines Road (Dublin), 75
Wall Street (New York)
Denis Desmond
MCD (McCann Desmond), Caroline

Desmond(wife), Mean Fiddler Music Group, Clear Channel,


Eamonn McCann, Olympia Productions, Gaeity
Investments, MCD Management Services, Abrakebabra
Limited (50%), DF Concerts(50%), MKG(20%), Joe `Def
Leppard Elliott, Joe Elliot, Harry Crosbie, Gerry Ryan
(decedent), Robbie Wootton, Graeme Beere (Graham
Beere)
Citywest Hotel, Citywest Convention Centre,
Gaiety theatre (Dublin), Olympia theatre (Dublin),
Ambassador theatre, SFX, Leeds festival, Reading festival,
Glastonbury festival(32%), Santas Kingdom, Santas
Kingdom, Abrekebabra, Today FM (Radio Ireland), Witnness
(Fairhouse Racecourse), T in the Park(Scotland), King Tuts
Wah Wah Hut, Academy Brixton (London), Saw Records
Hastings Hotels
William Hastings (Billy Hastings),
Howard Hastings (son), Landmark Investment Limited
(Merrion Hotel) Europa Hotel(Belfast), Merrion Hotel (50%),
six hotels in the North, including the Europa hotel in
Belfast
Sisk Capwell Investment, Sicon, Dragados, John Sisk and
Sons, El Seif (Saudi Arabia), Tom Costello
Aviva
Stadium(Dublin), Grand Canal Theatre(Dublin), tunnels
associated with Londons new commuter line, contracts in
the middle east, sailing club in Villefranche on the Cote
dAzur, Riyadh Techno Valley (Saudi Arabia)
Barry Gilligan Big Picture developments, Multi
Development, Northern Ireland Policing Board Nelson
Street(Belfast), The Bakery (Ormeau Road, Belfast),
Victoria Place, Fortwilliam Grange, The Courthouse Hotel,
The Lighthouse (236 apartments, Belfast), City hotel
(Londonderry, Derry)
CFRI-NCA Palladium Venture Commonfund Realty
Investors, Newport Capital Advisors, Anglo Irish Bank
Hollywood Palladium
Ger Killally, Gerard Killally
Naomi Killally (wife), Frank
Mulligan (Father-in-law), Brian Cowen, Gerard Killally
Auctioneers, Richie Connor, Daingean Road Partnership ,
Downshire Partnership, Stateridge Partnership, Dublin
Road Partnership, Plaza Developments Limited and KCDLG
Forbairt Holdings Limited, Cos Acts, Declan Ging (Declan
Guing), Frank Lawlor, Offaly County Council (chairman),
Adrian Daly, Miriam Kavanagh, Miriam Kavanagh &
Company solicitors, national Irish Bank, Peter Wheeler,

Jeremy Doyle (Doyle Hanlon Solicitors), John Burke and


Company (solicitors)
35-acre briquette factory (Mount
Lucas), Shean (family home Edenderry, Co Offaly), lands
at Cappincur (Tullamore), 16 acres at The
Downshire(Edenderry), lands at Dublin Road (Edenderry),
Plaza Hotel (Edenderry), 10 acres at Daingean
Road(Tullamore)
Noel Dempsey Noel Dempsey Construction Limited
Syngefield House (Birr, Offaly)
Joseph Brophy Ltd, Eden Development Homes Ltd, Helm
Housing Association Cluain Abhainn (Erry, Maryborough),
Watermill Place (Monastrevin, Monastrevan)
Marc Cochrane Sir Henry Marc Sursock Cochrane, Hala esSaid(wife), Hambros Bank Limited, GT Management PLC,
Faiza Maria Rosebud Cochrane (daughter), Alexander
Desmond Sursock Cochrane (son), Patrick Talal Cochrane
(son)site at Woodbrook(Shankill)
Reg Tuthill, Derek OLeary
Sandyford Forum
Developments, Jerry Ryan (HKR)
The Chase (Carmahall
Road), Red Oak North (South County Business Park
Leopardstown), Chapel Hill (Chapelizod), Red Oak South
(South County Business Park Leopardstown), The Forum
(Arkle Road,Ballymoss Road), The Courtyard(Carmanhall
Road), The Marlay (Kellytown Road), Shaw Street (Dublin),
Ballincollig Technology Park (Cork), Roebuck Hall
(Clonskeagh), Southside HQ, Mountainview, Blackthorn
Avenue(Sandyford)
Colm Butler (Colum Butler), Ciaran Butler
Chamber
Properties, Blanch Properties, Martinet Limited (Isle of
Man), South County Development, Entertainment
Enterprises
Red Oak office complex (South County
Business Park, Sandyford), Leisureplex, TGI Fridays, Hard
Rock Caf, Dudleys Field (Airfield estate, Dundrum), UCI
cinema chain
Cyril McGuire Trintech South County Business Park
Owen OCallaghan Rockboro Properties, Primerica, the
Mahon Tribunal, Barkhill Limited, Grosvenor Estates
18-20 Grafton Street(Fitzroy House, London),
Charlotte House (Mayfair), Liffey Valley Shopping Centre
Sheelin McSharry
Sheelin McSharry Bushy Park Limited
Bushy Park House (Terenure), Herbert Park Lane
(Ballsbridge), Ashbrook (Howth Road), Embassy House

(Ballsbridge)
Mchael Burke Burkeway Construction, Burkeway
Sandyford, John StauntonRivergrove (Oranmore, Galway),
Pointe Boise (Salthill, Galway), Time Place (Beacon
Quarter, Sandyford), Brighton Square (Foxrock), Forster
Court Hotel (Galway), Bolton Hall (Ballyboden)
Flynn OFlaherty
Jimmy Flynn (James Flynn), Noel
Flahery, Flynn OFlaherty (Dublin) Limited, Mick Cotter
The Pavilions shopping centre (Swords), Phoenix Park
Racecourse Development
Manor Park Homes Patrick Joseph Moran(PJ Moran, Joe
Moran), David Daly(Albany Homes), Manor Park
Homebuilders Limited, mary Bourke, Mark Bogard, Declan
Kenny, Gary Owens, IFG Group PLC, IFG Holdings Limited,
IFG Securities Limited, IFG Investments and Mortgage
Services Limited, IFG Pensco Limited, James Hay Holdings
Limited, Simply Mortgages Holdings Limited, New Manor
Developments, IWP International, PJ Mara, Richard Hayes,,
Irish Wire Products, Joseph ODriscoll, Development Capital
Corporation Limited (DCC), John F Supple Limited, John
Moran, Gerard Whyte, James Francis Flavin, Santander
Group, Tom Kavanagh (receiver, Kavanagh Fennell)Charles
Haughey home (Abbeville, Kinsealy), Ongar Stud (Clonee),
29-acre site at Cappagh Road(Finglas), 416 houses at
Pembroke Wood, Passage West in Co Cork, lands at
Hansfield(Blanchardstown), Lilys Court,(Dublin 15), Ongar
Square(Dublin 15), Ongar Village(Dublin 15), Ongar
Green(Dublin 15), Aston Village(Drogheda), Chapel
Farm(Lusk), Ongar Park(Dublin 15), Ongar Wood(Dublin
15), Ongar Chase(Dublin 15), Termon Abbey(Termonfeckin
Road , Drogheda), Grattan Hall(Dublin 13), Grattan
Lodge(Dublin 13), Feirnleigh(Sandford), Clare Hall
(Malahide Road) , Woodlawn(Santry), Sandyford Hall,
Swords Manor, Royal Oak, Aulden Grange(Santry),
Hazelwood(Clondalkin), Leopardstown Heights(Sandyford),
Templemanor(Walkinstown), Dorney Court(Shankhill),
Liscorrie (Crosslanes, Drogheda), Heathfield(Cappagh
Road, Finglas), Barnwell Hansfield(Hansfield, Dublin),
DeLacey Park (Liscorrie, Cross Lane, Drogheda), 33
Grafton Street (Dublin)
New Manor Developments
Mike Coffey
Queensgate
development(Birmingham, UK),

Event Horizon Limited


Mervyn Walsh, Largreen Ltd,
Sherside Ltd, Declain Taite (Receiver, ), Dorcas Walsh
(sister)
Rinuccini estate (Portlaois, Laois), Moyne
housing development (Enniscorthy), Lansdowne
Village(Ballsbridge, family home), property in Monaco
Graham Builders Limited family owned Maryborough
Village (Mountrath Road, Laois, Portlaois), The Downs
(Stradbally Road, Portlaoise), The Hermitage (Borris Road,
Portlaoise)
Middle East DevelopmentKensington Royale Investors
(KRI), Dubaicondoproperty.com
Kensington Royale
(Dubai Sports City)
Gleeson Modern Homes Limited
Michael Gleeson
MacRegol development (Birr, Co Offaly), Corr na
Meala (Birr, Co Offaly)
Brian Cunningham MOORVIEW DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED,
SALTHILL PROPERTIES LIMITED, VALEBROOK
DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED, SPRINGSIDE PROPERTIES
LIMITED, DRAKE S.C. LIMITED, MALLDRO S.C. LIMITED, THE
POPPINTREE MALL LIMITED, BLONDON PROPERTIES
LIMITED, the Cunningham Group, Ray Jackson (Receiver,
KPMG), Albert Reynolds, Pdraic White (Padraic White),
Tony Rooney, Patrick Gillen, Kanwell, Steepleview
PropertiesBanba hotel site (Salthill, Galway), 190apartment development in Malahide, Poppintree Mall
(Finglas), property in Maynooth
Aranbel Limited
Brayton Park Management Limited.,
Aranbel Construction Limited., Gainsmount Homes
Limited, Thomas Farrell, Liam Mounsey, Brendan Delaney,
Aranbel Kilcock Limited Fortunes Lawn (Citywest)
Galvin Developments
Souter Enterprises, Jeremiah
Galvin, Colm Galvin, Denis Galvin, John Shee, Joseph
Hanrahan 120 acre site at Cappagh(Co Kerry)
Denis OConnell
Brendan Quirke, Susan Quirke
Corbally Road, Cummer (Tuam, family home), 15
detached two-storey houses at Gardenfield (Tuam)
Dermot ORourke
Perle ORourke (wife), Jerry Conlon
(Gerry Conlon), Oberstown Developments Limited,
European Hotel Group, Reldon Limited, Keredern
partnership
Keredern House stud (Naas, family home),
400 acres associated with the Millennium Park business
park in Naas, Co Kildare, Barclays portfolio of High Street

properties (UK)
Emmet Memery
Cellular Services, Zoocom,
Lemongrass, Papillon Wines, Pulse Telecom, Oyster
Telecom, Conor Mohan, Leo Mohan, Ciao Caf (Baggott
Street)
Northumberland Road (Dublin, family home),
extensive property assets in Ireland, Britain, South Africa
and continental Europe
Corrigeen Construction Tommy Kane Heritage Hotel
(Portlaoise), 26 suburban houses at Vicarstown (Laois)
Claybourne Properties Limited Mark McCormack, Maria
McCormack(wife)
500-unit housing scheme
Graiguecullen(Fruithill, Laois), 154 houses at Burgage
Manor ( Blessington, Co. Wicklow)
Ellier Developments Francis Rhatigan, Chris Jones 655
houses and apartments at Ballycullen(Dublin),
Woodstown(Dublin), Corr Castle ( Howth), 85 apartments
at Lad Lane (Wilton Place,Dublin), apartment scheme at
Hanover Quay in the south Dublin docklands
Tom Crosby
Tarmonbarry, Termonbarry
(Roscommon)
SL Properties
218 new homes at Farranyoogan
(Longford Town)
BCS Homes Limited Gilroy Gannon (liquidator), Peter
Smyth
Silver Birches development (Stonepark,
Dunbeggan, Longford)
Michael Fingleton
Eileen Fingleton(wife), Irish
Nationwide Building Society (INBS), Charlie McCreevy,
Gerry Gannon, John Lyne, Senator Francie OBrien, Charles
McGuinness, Noel Mulligan, Francis OBrien, Louis Maguire,
UEP, New Fjord Developments (Petrovac, Montenegro),
Paradise Bay Resort, Svetlana Zenovich, Seamus Ross,
Menolly BV Netherlands lands at Clongriffin (north
Dublin), Liskilleen(Abingdon Park, Shankill, south Dublin,
family home), 17 acres of agricultural land at
Inniskeen(Monaghan), land at Stradone (Cavan), 41 acres
of agricultural land at Latton (Monaghan), 2 apartments at
Hotel del Golf complex (Marbella, Spain), two landbanks in
Castlebar (Co Mayo), Baltinglass (Co Wicklow), 62
apartments at the Booterstown Wood (even-storey block
on the corner of Booterstown Avenue and Stillorgan Road,
Dublin), Leopardstown Oaks (Dublin), Phibsborough Road
(Dublin), development land in Montenegro (URC Slavija

hotel and leisure centre, Hotel Fjord, Jugooceanija all in


Kotor, Montenegro), four apartments on the Mespil Estate
Meadowbank Developments Limited
K&K Homes
Plary Abbey(Ballymore),Eastmeadow(Ballivor),
Lismeen Hills(Cavan), Foxbrook(Ratoath)
Altara Homes Limited
Woodlands(Ratoath),
Delgany Glen (Delgany), The
Nurseries(Mulhuddart),Westbrook Glen (Blessington Road)
Walthill Developments
Corballis Demesne
(Ratoath)
Hollioake Limited
Sherwood Builders, Michael Hickey,
David Dalton, William Durkan Lanesboro(Finglas),Tullyhall
(Lucan), Rossberry (Lucan), 286 new homes at
Ratoath(Meath)
Atlas Developments Limited
16 houses at
Rathpeacon(Killeens, Co. Cork)
OBrien & OFlynn Limited
84 houses and 6
apartments at Lotamore(Glanmire, Co.Cork)
Euro North West Construction Limited
22 houses at
Dunross(Culduff, Co. Donegal)
Ballyboden Farms Limited
71 apartments at The
Heights (Woodpark, Ballinteer)
Mycete Construction Limited
538 apartments at
Mariaville(Maynooth, Co. Kildare), Dunboyne(Meath)
M&G Homes Limited
122 houses at Rochfortbridge
Village( Rochfortbridge, Co. Westmeath)
S&K Carey Limited
133 houses at Lacken
Road(Kilbarry, Waterford)
Sonnet Limited
31 apartments at the corner of Dublin
Road and Quinns Road(Shankill, Co. Dublin)
Buffdale Limited
24 apartments at
Rocklands(Drumalee, Cootehill, Cavan)
Batty Hayes
72 dwellings at
Cappanclare(Inchigeelagh, Cork)
B&E Construction
27 houses at Beechwood(Park,
Lifford, Donegal)
Pat Blee, Cathal Blee
50 houses at Drumrooske
Middle(Donegal)
Habitat for Humanity
14 dwellings Belclare
Green/Balbutcher Lane South(Ballymun, Dublin)
Ballymun Regeneration Limited
72 apartments at
57-128 Sillogue Avenue(Ballymun)

LJM Ireland Ltd


44 dwellings
Skenagun/Cartefarm(Castledermot, Kildare)
Patrick Purcell
13 houses at Kilmurray(Slieverue,
Kilkenny)
Pat Moore Partnership
35 houses at ODonnell
Land(Cooltaderry, Portarlington, Laois)
Liam McMahon
50 houses at Ballymorris
Road(Portarlington, Laois)
The Chantier Partnership
145 dwellings at Chantier
Gate(Beladd, Portlaoise)
Seamus Argue Comer, Kieran Argue Comer
51
houses at Baltray Road(Balfeddock, Termonfeckin, Louth)
McCaughey Developments Limited 43 houses at Old Golf
Links Road(Blackrock)
Caroline Thompson
27 houses at Kiltamagh
Townland(Kiltimagh, Sligo)
Rockview Developments
445 dwellings at Duleek
Road(Lagavooren, Meath)
Michael Glynn
193 dwellings at Seffin(Birr, Offaly)
Martin Murphy
70 houses at Kilcoursey Road(Clara,
Offaly)
John OSullivan
116 houses at Daingean
Road(Cappincur, Tullamore)
Dario Morelli
52 houses at Cloonybeirne
Townland(Lanesboro Road, Roscommon)
Edenabbey Developments Limited 101 bungalows at
Clogheen Market(Cahir, Tipperary)
Six Cross Roads Real Estate Limited ten houses at
Ballyhoo(Kilbarry Road, Waterford)
Donohoe Building Ltd
204 apartments at
Clonbrusk(Athlone, Westmeath)
James Duffy & Sons
12 dwellings at Kilcleagh(Moate,
Westmeath)
Marc Scully
12 houses at
Nevillescourt(Ballycanew, Wexford)
Patrick OBrien
18 houses at Ramsgrange(Kilcowan,
Wexford)
Quayfront Limited
27 apartments and houses at
North Quay(Arklow, Wicklow)
Gerald Barton Landmark National, Landmark Land
Company Inc, Kiawah Development Partners, Godchaux
Doonbeg Golf complex, Apes Hill Club(Barbados),

Lost Canyons Golf club(California)


David Drumm Anglo, Lorraine Drumm(wife), Ken Drumm
(brother), Okohaus Superstructures Limited, Harborlight
Capital Partners, Delta Corporate Finance,Mayo Holdings,
JM Realty, JM Realty, Mayo Three, Susan Drumm, Mary
Drumm, Michael Barnett 20 Abington (Malahide, Dublin),
Stage Neck Road(Cape Cod, Massachussetts), The
Way(Skerries Rock, Dublin), 73 Old Coloney Road
(Wellesley, Mass), construction of schools in Gorey, Co
Wexford and Portlaoise, Co Laois, Judge Roy Beans pub on
Nassau Street (central Dublin), 173 Cross Street
(Chatham, Massachusetts)
Lee Hotel Group
Mespil Hotel(Dublin), Sligo Park
hotel (Sligo), the Kenmare Bay hotel
Achilleas Kallakis
Pacific Group. Stefanos Kollakis,
Martin Lewis, Green Property, Alex Williams, The Institute
of Heraldic Affairs, Project Eastern Ridge 32 St Jamess
Square(London), 234,000 sq ft headquarters of the
Telegraph newspaper group, bought for 218m, 7-8 St
Jamess Square for 120m, Apollo and Lunar House in
Croydon for 95m, Market Towers in Vauxhall for 75m
and the India Buildings (Liverpool)
Peter Stritch
Brian McEnery(Horwarth Bastow Charleton,
receiver), Bank of Scotland(Ireland), BoSI, Bellisle
Properties (liquidation) Groody Student Village(Limerick)
Ely Property Group Verum Limited, Philip Marley,
Newcourt Group PLC, Brian Winters, David Campbell,
734 bed student accommodation and commercial use
development in Birmingham City Centre, 6 student blocks
in Ireland & UK comprising 1,772 beds, Aldborough House
(Portland Row, Dublin)
Senator Ivor Callely Seanad Eireann
48 St Davids
Wood(Artane, Dublin): letting, co-ownership of 59/60
Clontarf Road (Dublin), investment
Ward family
Ward Anderson Group, Alburn(Noel Smyth),
UCI/ Leisureplex , Abbey Films cinema complex at The
Square shopping centre(Tallaght, south Dublin), 150
screens in Ireland(including Dublins Savoy),Abbey Films.
Blackrock International Land Fyffes, Robert Knox,
Balmoral International Land Public Limited Company, Carl
McCann, Michael OFlynn, Rosecastle Limited Xerox
Technology Park( Dundalk), Royal Bank of Scotland (Milton

Keynes, UK), Drum Estate(Edinburgh), on Belgian


warehouse and office properties, warehouses, offices and
industrial buildings in Belfast, Southampton and London,
land in Swords, Co Dublin, and offices in Clonshaugh, Co
Dublin.
Corbo Properties
Sam Morrison, Sam Morrison (son),
Stephen Kirkpatrick Longwood Road Retail Park
(Newtownabbey, NI), Damolly Retail Park (Newry, NI), 4854 Donegall Place (Belfast), Fairhill shopping centre
(Fairhill centre, Ballymena), Cityside shopping centre
(Cityside retail park, North Belfast), supermarket at
Ballyronan Road (Magherafelt), Replay, Remus Uomo,
Sixty and Clockwork Orange clothes stores and the Tommy
Hilfiger franchise,
Jay Bourke
Sherland Entertainments Limited, RTE(The
Mentor), Southlinch Limited, Shebeen Shic Limited
(trading as Thomas House), Mercroft Taverns Limited,
Bellinter House Ltd, Simon Kelly,John Reynolds, Eoin
Foyle,Jan Kohler, Declan Taite (receiver, FGS),OHagan
Contract Interiors LimitedCaf Bar Deli (Ranelagh), Caf
Bar Deli (South Great Georges Street, Dublin), Caf Bar
Deli (Cork), Eden Restaurant (Temple Bar, Dublin), Bellinter
House (Meath), The Skylab Building (Exchange Street,
Dublin), Leinster Road, Rathmines (family home, Dublin)
Noel Lyons
Ferndale Leisure PLC, Tom
Kavanagh(Kavanagh Fennell, receivers), Ferndale Leisure
Limited, Ovidstown Developments Limited, Golf
Partnership Ireland Limited, Sun Art Fine Art Limited,
Outside World Limited
Knockanally Golf and Country
Club (Ovidstown, Naas, Kildare)
Leslie Buckley Carmel Buckley (wife), Digicel (Carribbean
telecoms),McInerney, Irish News and Media, Aer Lingus,
Agra Trading, Monaghan Mushrooms, Jefferson Smurfit
Group, Telecom Eireann, Esat, Iarnrd Eireann, Irish Steel,
Waterford Crystal, Esat, E-Power, Digicel, Saongroup, ICAN
developments at Knockboy(Waterford), Haven housebuilding project in Haiti., Dalkey (family home),house in
west Cork, Quinta do Lago (Algarve)
Michael Lynn Brid Murphy(wife), Rory O Farrell(receiver),
Cathal Power (brother in law), Croi 61(Hungary), Kendar,
Kendar Bulgaria, Nuno Paulino Glenlion House (Howth,
family home), 20 St Albans Park(Sandymount, family

home), Dromahair (Leitrim), 156 apartment Sziv 61, Costa


de Cabanas(Portugal)
London and Metropolitan (London & Metropolitan) Ian
Livingstone, Richard Livingstone, Niall Gunne Eircom
Building (Citywest, Dublin), 55 Baker Street(London),
David Lloyd fitness centre (South Dublin)
McCLOSKEY AND OKANE BUILDING COMPANY LIMITED
Greencastle Fort Hotel (Donegal)
Niall McManus and Company Limited
Declan Taite
(Farrell Grant Sparks, FGS, receiver)
Corryard Wood,
drumshambo, Drumshanbo (Leitrim)
Bonane Limited
Jim Horgan, Ian OLeary, Thomas J
ODriscoll (Thomas ODriscoll, Tom ODriscoll), Horgan
Meats. James Horgan (son)
a property in Douglas (Cork)
Patrick HegartyWG Mitchell, Ernst and Young (Ernst &
Young, E&Y, Administrator), WG Mitchell (Derry), WG
Mitchell (Richmond) Limited properties at Charlotte
Square, George Street (Edinburgh), Richmond Shopping
centre (Derry, Londonderry), properties at Fraserburgh,
Glasgow and Perth (Scotland),10 industrial, office and
retail properties located in Derry, Portadown and Antrim,
Quay leisure park (Glasgow), Point Hotel (Edinburgh),
Caledonian Hotel(Edinburgh), Radisson SAS (Royal Mile,
Edinburgh), Park Inn (Glasgow), Park Inn (Sheffield),
Ramada Cromwell Hotel (Stevenage), Ramada
(Colchester), Ramada (Bury St Edmunds), Ramada (Kings
Lynn), Ramada (Peterborough)
Jim Corr The Corrs, Liam Marks, Philip Marks 91 (97?)
acres at Goresbridge(Kilkenny), Old Windmill Road,
Crawfordsburn, Bangor (family home, Co Down)
Mansford Real Estate
Oliver Smith, Charles Knight
Strabane Retail Park, Chelsea Harbour (Chelsea,
London), Brains brewery (Cardiff), Swinton Shopping
Centre (Manchester), Renaissance Lifecare (UK), Rolle
(Switzerland)
Taggart Properties Michael Taggart, Dermont Group, John
Taggart, Bill ORiordan (receiver, Pricewaterhouse
Coopers), Garth Callow (administrator, Pricewaterhouse
Coopers) Taggart Lands (Belfast, Coleraine), building
houses in Navan
Neil OCallaghan
Sherborough Development Company,
Brodnax, Persian Properties
OCallaghan Hotels

(4xDublin, Gibraltar, Maryland(US)) OCallaghan Alexander


hotel (Dublin) OCallagha Davenport (Dublin) OCallaghan
St Stephens Green (Dublin), Mont Clare Hotel (Dublin)
Karl Morris
Simple Overseas Properties, Denise Morris
(wife), Georgina Cooke (former director), Asilah Invest,
Fatima Mbarki property in Schull (Cork), Mijas (Costa del
Sol, Spain), golf and beach complex Tangiers Tangier
(Morocco), business interests in Spain, Asilah Marina Golf
and the Asilah Beach Resort
Patrick Kelly (decedent, Patrick J Kelly, Paddy Kelly, Gentle
Paddy Kelly)
Kelland Homes, Patrick Kelly Jnr (son),
Rockbriar, Markland Holdings, Sean Mulryan, Drumaville
Consortium, Aidan Scully, Joe Shannon Sunderland
Football Club, Sunderland AFC, Kptva department store
(Prague), Elmfield House (Ballyogan Road, Sandyford), 5
Bessborough Hall (Rathmines, Dublin)
Glenford Construction (Wicklow)
Kieran Wallace (KPMG,
receiver) 30 apartments on Eglinton Road(Donnybrook,
Dublin), a site in Co Wicklow
Superstructure Construction Declan Taite (Farrell Grant
Sparks, FGS, receiver)
investment properties in Dublin,
279 Richmond Road (Fairview, Dublin)
Michael Murphy
Margaret Murphy(wife), Michael
Murphy jnr(son), Gail Fitzgerald (nee Murphy, daughter),
Thomas Murphy(son), Liam McArdleElsinore (family home,
Castletroy, Limerick)
Charles Anthony Cromwell (Charles Cromwell)15m site in
Donabate(Dublin)
John Cotter
John A Cotter, Finbar Tierney, Darren Cotter
properties at Compass Hill(Kinsale), Well
Road(Douglas, Cork), site at Farm Lane, (Kinsale)
Noel Mulligan
433 houses and apartments at
Swellan (outside Cavan town, Cavan)
Vico Capital
Brian ODonnell, Dr Mary Patricia ODonnell
(wife), Redicent Limited, GreyStoke Societe Anonyme, a
company registered in Luxembourg; Vico Swiss Holdings
AG, and Avoca Properties Limited, William Fry law practice
(Dublin) Sanctuary Building (Victoria, London), 17
Columbus Courtyard (Canary Wharf, London), Fatburen
office block (Stockholm), 2009 Pennsylvania Avenue
(Washington, DC), Westferry Circus in Londons Canary
Wharf district, Gorse Hill, Vico Road (family home, Killiney,

Dublin), Ailesbury Road in Ballsbridge, and a lakeside


country estate on Lough Corrib at Oughterard in Co
Galway, ski chalet in the French resort of Courchevel
Kuvera Ireland Kuvera India and VG Buildtech, Kieran
Murphy, Seymour Major, Kuvera Properties (India) Pvt Ltd,
Dr Ajit Jha, Kuvera (Ireland) Limited Orchard View and
Mountain View (Rudrapur, in northern India), Kieran
Murphy, Cabinteely Way, Cabinteely, Co Dublin, Seymour
Major solicitors, Belmore Street, Enniskillen, Dernawilt
Road, Enniskillen (family home, Seymour Major)
Jackson Way Properties Limited
Jim Kennedy (James
Kennedy),John Caldwell, Frank Dunlop, Regents Park
Developments Limited, Joseph Kennedy (son), Antoinette
Kennedy (daughter), Patrick Kennedy (son), Alan Holland,
Paisley Park, Deputy Liam Lawlor (decedent) 107 acres in
Carrickmines (Dublin), Amusement City amusement
arcade at Westmoreland Street(Dublin), 422-homes
project and six shops and a creche (Stapolin, Baldoyle)
BAM Contractors Limited Ascon Contractors,Royal Bam
Beamish Crawford brewery site in Cork city,Portlaoise
Public Private Partnership bypass and the Luas extension
to Citywest.
Bernard Doyle Kantak Enterprises, Bernard McNamara,
David Courtney, John Sweeney, Jerry OReilly, Marumba
Properties, David Carson (receiver, Deloitte), Terry
Sweeney, Simon Burke, Eoin Doyle (brother) , Evan Doyle
(brother), Firefly Properties, Brooklodge Estate Limited,
Durgman Entertainment Limited
Shelbourne
House(Stephens Green), Finglas Shopping Centre,
Superquinn, Brooklodge Hotel, Macreddin golf course
( Aughrim),
Pat Shine Pricewaterhouse Coopers (PwC), Ayers
Properties, Ardawn Developments, Peter Murray, Sen
Lyne, Brendan Fitzsimons, Greg Dilger, Ardawn
Developments Two, Bill Mulrooney, Brendan Fitzsimons,
Eamonn Quinn 158 acres it owns around Blackditch House
Michael Fitzgerald Properties Limited
Michael
Fitzgerald, Peter Fitzgerald (son), Paul Fitzgerald (son),
Fitzgerald Group
Gortard (family home, Clarinbridge,
Co Galway), 21 mixed-use commercial units on a site in
Roscommon town, developments in Galway city, The Mill
apartments (Ballisodare, Sligo)

Walsh Maguire and Company Limited


Grant Thornton
(receivers), Vincent Maguire, Liam Moran, Stateford
Limited, Deputy Bertie Ahern, Tim Collins, Martin Harte,
Mark McGrane, Peter McIlroy,Tom Kennedy Snr, Tom
Kennedy, Tom Callanan, Manor Park Homebuilders,
Michael Gillen The Waterfront apartment block
(Drumcondra, Dublin), a commercial property in
Blackhorse House Industrial Estate(Dublin 7), 154 twobedroom apartments and 22 luxury penthouses in Grattan
Hall (Dublin 13), shopping centres at Clondalkin and
Navan, Fyffes PLC fruit storage and distribution centre at
Smithfield, courthouse and Garda Station (Dun Laoghaire),
Pope John Paul II National School (Malahide), mixed
development of office and residential space at Chancery
Lane, (Dublin 8), mixed development of residential and
retail space at Windsor Terrace, mixed development
covering 1.2 ha at Hamlet Lane (Balbriggan), mixed
development in Dun Laoghaire, AIB premises (Dundrum
and Rathgar), new development in Castleknock (close to
the Phoenix Park gates), 50m flagship 17 storey hotel as
well as 150,000sq ft commercial space in Clonshaugh,
developments in Shankill, development at The Courtyard
(North Great Georges Street), mixed development in
Zellam See (Austria)
Airspace Investments Limited Ken Rohan, James Rohan,
Rohan construction Grand Canal Plaza (Grand Canal
Street, Dublin), Dublin AirPort Logistics Park (Santry, North
Dublin), Airways Industrial Estate (Santry, North Dublin)
Louis Maguire
http://www.tribune.ie/article/2005/jun/05/green-lightfor-huge-apartment-and-office-scheme-o/
Ratno
Ostrvo (Beograd, Belgrade), Vega City project (north Co
Dublin), development land in Montenegro (URC Slavija
hotel and leisure centre, Hotel Fjord, Jugooceanija all in
Kotor, Montenegro)
Deerpark Tom Kavanagh (receiver, Kavanagh Fennell),
Belgard Partnership, Flynn Partnership Belgard Inn and
Cocos Nightclub (Tallaght)
Nuns Cross Partnership (Nuns Cross Partnership) Patrick
Doyle, Avondale Hall, Wicklow town; David Kelly,
Rathdown Villa, Rathdown, Greystones; Earle Kelly, Amego
Farms, Blacklion, Greystones; Kenneth Vickers, Seaview

Road, Wicklow town; Joseph Ronan, Mill House, Clora,


Nuns Cross, Ashford and Rory Fahey, Seapoint, Brittas
Road, Co Wicklow .25 acre site at Nuns Cross, Ashford,
Co Wicklow
Kieran Flanagan
development lands at Kilcolgan
and Claregalway, Co Galway, a site at Bunratty, Co Clare
Griffin Group Hotels Liam Griffin
Monart Destination
Spa, Hotel Kilkenny, Ferrycarraig Hotel
Aidan Brooks Sloane Capital, John McManus, JP Magnier
Ralph Lauren Store (Manhattan), Piaget store (Bond
Street)
Stephen Carr Patricia Carr
office accommodation at
Drinagh, Rosslare Road, Wexford
Shane Murphy Renaissance Financial Markets, Watermarx,
MLM, Rosaleen Giffney (wife), Rosaleen Murphy (wife),
Burrem Investments11, Abington, Malahide (family home,
Co Dublin), six-storey apartment complex on Dublins
Dorset Street
FCF Development John Fallon, Stephen Fallon and
Eugene Cawley, Kieran Wallace (receiver, KPMG) Hotel
Ballina (Mayo, formerly called the Ramada Manor House
Hotel)
Edward Fahy and Sinead Fahy Ravenshaw, White Lace,
Declan Taite (receiver, FGS)
Barrys Hotel (Dublin)
Green Property Company TPG Capital, Stephen Vernon,
Mark Munro, David Bonderman, Ryanair, Green Property
Investment Fund 1 PLC, Martlet Holdings, Green Property
Limited (UK registered), James McKenna, Paul Culhane
Blanchardstown Town Centre, Royal Liver portfolio
Edinburgh House
Tony Quayle
Castle Mall (Antrim
town)
Active Retail Fund Hunter Property Fund Management,
Centenary Investments Castle Mall (Antrim town), the
Priory in Worksop, the Guineas in Newmarket
Network Trading Group Limited
John Hansen
(liquidator, KPMG), Adrian Nicholl, Sonah (NI) Limited, the
Thornton Trust Highways Hotel (Larne), Church House
(Belfast)
Sean Quinn
Patricia Quinn (wife), Miriam McMahon
(sister), Tommy McMahon (brother-in-law), Peter Quinn
(brother), Sean Quinn jnr (son), Brenda Quinn (daughter),
Aoife Quinn (daughter), Colette Quinn (daughter), Ciara

Quinn (daughter), Peter Quinn (nephew), Stephen Kelly


(son-in-law), Niall McPartland (son-in-law), Quinn Insurance
Limited, Quinn Property Management, Peter Quinn,
Bouverie No 2 Limited, Leonardo Property Fund, Quinn
Life, Leonardo Property Pension Fund,Quinn Cement,
Quinn Glass and Quinn Insurance, Lud Investments Limite
(Cyprus), Moshaid Investments Limited (Cyprus), Opawa
Investments Limited (Cyprus), Pahu Limited (Cyprus),
Tarate Enterprises Limited (Cyprus), Morboneto Holdings
Limited (Cyprus), Quinn Investments Sweden, Bazzely
(Madeira), Finansstroy (Finanstroi), Indian Trust, The
Cranaghan Foundation Castorama/Avrora Centre (Ufa,
Russia), Caspiy Centre (Moscow), Q-City (Hyderabad,
India), Univermag Ukraina (Kiev, Kyiv, Ukraine), Prestige
Mall (Bahcesehir, Turkey), The Slieve Russell Hotel, Ciin
Spa & Wellness Centre, Buswells Hotel (Dublin), Holiday
Inn (Nottingham), Crowne Plaza (Cambridge, UK), Ibis
Hotel (Prague),Hilton Hotel (Prague), The Belfry
(Birmingham), Hilton Hotel (Sofia, Bulgaria), Sheraton
Hotel (Krakow, Poland), Leonardo Business Centre (Kiev,
Kyiv, Ukraine), Kutuzoff Business Centre (Moscow),
Gateway 28 Distribution (Penny Emma Way, Sutton-inAshfield, Nottinghamshire), Kazan Logistics Park (Kazan,
Russia), the Belfry hotel and golf course in Britain, 9000
sqm offices at IDA Business and Technology Park (Navan,
Co Meath)
John Kelly Richard Durkin, Thomas Byrne, Sinead Kelly
(stepdaughter), Frank McCarthy
Hunters Moon,
Kilquade (family home, Co Wicklow), properties in Dublin
and in Greenwich, England, Blarney Golf Resort, properties
in James Street, Dublin, 16-acre development site in
Oilgate, Wexford
Johnny Owens
Coill Rua (Mullingar)
George Wilkin
residential development sites in Bray,
Roselawn Green, Boghall Road (family home, Bray, Co
Wicklow)
The Irish Life/BCP Property Fund
De Beers (45-50
Old Bond Street, London)
Brenda Graham, Gareth Graham
Fernhill Propeties
Limited, Fernheath Developments College Court (King
Street, Belfast), flats at Whitewell Road (north Belfast)
James Greene and Son
Manhattan Bar (Lower Friars

Walk, Cork)
Frank Fahy
Shannon Homes Dublin, Shannon Homes
Investments
Laraghcon development in Lucan, schemes
in Balgriffin off the Malahide Road
Charlie Kenny Clancourt, Mall Holdings, Kenny family
Dunlop Centre on Hatch Street, Liffey Valley shopping
centre, Crescent shopping centre in Limerick, Harcourt
Centre office blocks in Dublin, Atlantic Coast hotel in Mayo
Brennan family Brennans bread
Hamleys toy store on
Regent Street, London, Tiffanys building on Bond Street
(London), Versace shop (Bond Street)
Tom McHugh, Thomas McHughThomas McHugh
(Kilcloghans) Limited, Tom McHugh (Kilcloghans) Limited,
Galway County Council, Sally McHugh (wife), St Jarlaths
Credit Union (Tuam) Clochran estate in Kilcloghans, family
shop at Kiltevna, Ard Ri House Hotel
Simon Elias, Izak Senbahar
Alexico group, RPAP, Atlas
Securities and Rock Point, Procaccianti The Mark hotel,
Alex hotel and Flatotel hotel (New York)
Ivor Fitzpatrick Errisford Development Limited a Eurocopter
EC120B, Christina O yacht, distribution agencies and in
quarries in south-east Asia, a quarry business at Vinh
(Vietnam), development at South Anne Street in Dublin
Hayfield Leisure Limited Mark Scally, Joseph Scally,
Margaret Scally
Hayfield Manor hotel, Killarney Royal
Hotel.
Ivan YatesFine Gael, Celtic Bookmakers, Joe Molloy
Bookmakers, May Yakes (mother), Deirdre Yates (wife),
Neil Hughes (receiver)
49 betting shops including
Swansea and Bristol, 16-acre farm at Enniscorthy( family
home, Co Wexford)
Mark Steinberg, Terence Cole Marcol, Chelsea Harbour
Limited, City and General, Compco, Advent International,
Median
Chelsea harbour (310 Private Apartments,
Serviced Offices, Design Centre)
Pollock Developments
Vow Road (Ballymoney),
development sites and properties in Ballymoney,
Bushmills and Dervock
Hawthorn Asset Management
Glen Road (Garvagh,
Derry), properties in Maghera, including a petrol station,
17 acres of development land at Stranorlar in County
Donegal along with a partially sold housing development

NMC Developments Neil McCann Brookfield Mill (North


Belfast)
Firestone Developments Limited
OMoore Park
GAA grounds (Portlaoise)
TS Taverns
Moran Hotels, Tom Moran, Sheila Moran, Alf
Smiddy, Tom Ward. 6 Bewleys hotel chain, 4 Moran hotels,
Red Cow Inn
Laing ORourke Ray ORourke, Des ORourke Welsh 21st
Century Schools programme
Ricky Byrne
R Byrne Concrete Limited, Salthill Court
Hotel Limited Salthill Hotel, Eyre Square hotel, Victoria
hotel, Metro Hotel (Leicestershire)
Windsor Securities
Shore Road Retail Park
McGimpsey and Kane (MGK) Bryan McGimpsey and Ian
Robinson Glenville Road (Newtownabbey), Alexandra Park
(Holywood), Glenburn Manor(Glenburn Road, Dunmurry),
Waterfront Apartments (Shore Road, Portaferry), Altona
Manor (Church Rd, Holywood), Andersonstown
(Andersonstown Road, Belfast), Central Avenue(Central
Avenue, Bangor), Chaplin Gate (New Road, Donaghadee),
Croft Road (Croft Road, Holywood), Longfields
(Ballyhalbert, Co Down), McConnells Yard (High St,
Comber), Rectory Wood (Portaferry), Warren Manor
(Warren Rd, Donaghadee)
Killarney Hotels Limited Liebherr Hotels AG The Europe
Hotel & Resort , Dunloe Castle Hotel, Hotel Ard na Sidhe.
Shay Daly, Seamus Daly Eileen Daly (wife), Gary Hyde
Kinvara, Woodleigh Park, Model Farm Road (home,
Cork), The Castle Tavern, Glanmire, Co Cork
Jim McGettigan Bonnington Group Regency hotel
(Dublin), North Star hotel (Dublin), Royal Hotel (Bray, Co
Wicklow), the Cavendish Hotel (London)and Bonnington
Rooms (London), Bonnington Jumeirah Lakes Towers
(Dubai), 300-bed four-star hotel and business park at
Gillette Corner (west London)
Jim McConnon
Main Street in Castleblayney, Co
Monaghan, Castleblayney Shopping Centre, Supervalu
(Castleblayney)
Niall McFadden Boundary Services Limited, Boundary
Radio Limited, Boundary Management Limited, Leisa
Benner (wife), Buy & Sell, Paddy Kelly, Boundary Advisory
Services UK Limited, Boundary Equity Holdings (Isle of

Man)Avoca Wood( family home Blackrock, Co Dublin), LL


Hotel and the Clarion Hotel (Dublin airport)
Bernard Somers
Michael Somers (brother, ex-NTMA),
Central Bank, Irish News and Media (IN&M), Dublin City
Council (DCC), Allied Irish Banks (AIB), Bernard McNamara,
PCP One, Joe OReilly
Champion Sports
Malachy Devine
Devann Developments Limited
Rockland Gardens (Portstewart, Derry)
Bernard Duffy Geraldine Duffy (wife), TDB Holdings,
Elverys Sports Galway Bay Half Marathon, Chancery Place
Limited, Chancery Place Sarl Limited, Granelt Properties
Limited, DH Partnership, Shane, Hugh Heskin, Barry
Heskin, Michael Heskin, Spikita Holdings Limited, Haroko
Limited Crawley Business Quarter (Sussex, UK), 12storey joint venture development in Manchester
Seafield Holdings Partnership Richard Coffey, Brian
OHagan, Donal Hunt, Rory OCallaghan, Viv OCallaghan,
Vickerys Hotel (New Street, Bantry), Kiddycare (New
Street, Bantry), World Choice Travel (New Street,
Bantry);Avoca Park, Blackrock, Co Dublin; Talbot Lodge,
Grove Avenue, Blackrock, Co Dublin; Golf Course, Cahir,
Bantry; Snave, Ballylickey, Bantry; Blackrock Road, Bantry
(all family homes)
Olympus Developments and Investments
Mayne
Developments, Castle Bay Residential and Holiday Park
Limited , Gavin Logan
a nine acre site at Falledeen (Co
Roscommon), site at Leswalt (near Stranraer, Scotland), a
site at Melvin Road (Garrison, Co Fermanagh), a caravan
park at Portpatrick (Scotland), Windsor and Seahaven in
Groomsport; Ballyhalbert Caravan Park and Park Homes
and Cloughey Holiday Village
Carvill Group Christopher Carvill, Patrick Carvill
(decedent, founder), Carvill (Scotland) Limited, Carvill
(Newcastle) Limited projects in Germany, as well as
Northern Ireland, England and Scotland, Sirocco Works site
(Belfast), WOODBROOK, (BROKERSTOWN VILLAGE,
LISBURN), THE EMBANKMENT (ANNADALE, BELFAST),
ROSS THOMPSON SITE (NEWRY CITY CENTRE)
Patrick Murphy Gilliam Murphy (wife)
Falcons Hill,
Lovers Walk, Montenotte (family home, Cork), portfolio
includes houses, apartments, retail units, factories, pubs
almost all in County Cork as well as a development in

Slovakia
Abbey Hotel Co-ownership
Denis M McDowell, John
Paul McDowell and Breen JF Purcells, practising as
McDowell Purcell Solicitors, Capel Building, Dublin
Ray MacSharry (Ray McSharry)
Foresthaze
Developments Limited, Marc MacSharry(son), Jackie
McMahon, Ken McMoreland, Ray MacSharry jnr, Celtic
Foods, Gerard Healy c/o Kevinsfort Ltd, Damien Torsney,
Edward Donaghy,Jacqueline Donaghy
200 houses and
apartments on the site of the former Saehan Media plant,
Hazelwood outside Sligo, Alcantar, Pearse Road, (family
home, Sligo)
Liam Smyth
Sanguinis, Kieran Wallace (receiver, KPMG),
Lavister Investments, Kantington, Kingsland Clothing,
Oxford Investments Ashbourne House Hotel (Co Meath),
Argentinian embassy (Ailesbury Drive, Ballsbridge, Dublin
4), Clyde Road (family home, Ballsbridge), buildings on
Leeson Street, Adelaide Road and Duke Street (Dublin), a
property on Oxford Street in London, a property on Capel
Street in Dublin, and has leasehold properties in the St
Stephens Green Centre, the Ilac shopping centre and on
Liffey Street (Dublin), 388-396 Oxford Street (London),
Corrib House (52 Lower Leeson Street, Dublin), Enterprise
House (57 Adelaide Road, Dublin), 18 and 19 Duke Street
(off Grafton Street, Dublin), property interests in New York
(USA)
Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum
Frank Kelly
Ann Kelly (wife)
Seamus P Leonard (Seamus Leonard)
Leonard Brothers
Ros Mor development of houses and apartments in
Donegal Town (Donegal), completed projects and
undeveloped sites mainly around Omagh (Tyrone)
Colm ORourke John Farrelly (Fine Gael TD and councillor),
James OReilly and Joseph OReilly. shopping centre, 375
houses and apartments, a pub, restaurant, nursing home
and creche at Clonmagadden (Navan, Co Meath)
McWilliams Homes Billy ORiordan (receiver,
PricewaterhouseCoopers, PwC), Garth Calow (receiver,
PricewaterhouseCoopers, PwC), Prestige JP
lands at Muff
in Donegal,properties at Ballymacool and
Newtowncunningham in Donegal and Portstewart in Derry
Ricardo Miranda Miret, Ricardo Miret
Sungolf, Ocean

View Properties, Antonio Flores (Lawbird, Marbella) 350


luxury apartments at the Estepona Country Club on the
Costa del Sol, a property development, Punta Perla, in the
Dominican Republic,
David Kennedy Formation Group PLC, Formation Design &
Build Limited, Formation Architectural Design Limited,
Formation Asset Management Limited, Bucher Woods
Corporate Recovery, Kevin Moran (Irish Republic
footballer), Niall OCarroll, Julius Properties, JV Finance
Limited Aldgate East tube station (London), Clancy
Barracks site in Island Bridge (Heuston Station, Dublin),
site in Drimnagh, in Dublin, 1 Commercial Street (London)
and 101-110 Whitechapel High Street, E1 (London)
Rhatigan Group
JJ Rhatigan and Co, Paul Fanning,
Rhatigan Commercial Developments and Shoreview, Paul
McCann (receiver, Grant Thornton), Padraic Rhatigan,
Goodbody private investors
Castle Way, on Golden Lane
in Dublin 8 beside Dublin Castle, Heuston South Quarter
(Dublin)
Maurice Healy Calyx, Better Capital, Jon Moulton
Glencoe, Knocksinna, Foxrock,(family home, Co
Dublin)
Anthony Alken Alken Group, Greg Alken, Gateway
MultiModal
former SDS site on the Naas road in west
Dublin
Walter King, Peter Gilhooley Michael Burke, Tom
Considine, Odeon Syndicate OConnells pub in Eyre
Square (Galway), Odeon House, Eyre Square (Galway),
townhouses in the area of Eyre Square (Galway)
Tuskar Group Tuskar Commercial Investment Property
Services Limited (TCIPS), Alan Hynes, John Power, Scott
Wallace, Mary Rowney, Tuskar Asset Management plc, East
Quay Hotel and Leisure Limited, Bodjaca 8135 Limited,
Tuskar Development Co Limited, and Tuskar Residential
Investment Properties Limited, John Power, James Boggan
and Liam Eviston, Tuskar Bulgaria Limited, Tuskar Property
Holdings Limited, Declan Taite and Joan Williams
(receivers, FGS)
Horningsea, Cambridge, in England
(family home, Alan Hynes), Castlepark Court (Dalkey,
Dublin), Riverbank House Hotel (Wexford), a site in
Bulgaria, the Iceland site (Dun Laoghaire)
Dan Buckley Whitechurch (DBW)
Dan Buckley,

Blaithnaid Buckley Barleyfield (Whitechurch, Cork),


Lavallin (Whitechurch, Cork)
Tommy Hopkins (Tom Hopkins, Thomas Hopkins, Tomas
Hopkins) Mairead Hopkins (wife), Hopkins Trust,
Marchbury Properties, Thomas Durcan, Banagher
Investments, Phb Endow, Tom Browne and Paul Pardy, John
Hughes Palmerston Park, Rathmines, (Family home,
Dublin), a property on Kenilworth Square, Rathgar, Dublin,
sites in Maynooth, Co Kildare, and Donabate, Co Dublin,
222 houses in Balbriggan, Co Dublin, property
developments in Stoneybatter, Dublin
Bridgestock Limited Mid Town Property Development
Limited (Mid-Town Property Development), Seamus Gillen
asylum seeker accommodation centres in Co Mayo,
Sligo, Galway, and Westmeath providing accommodation
to 934 asylum seekers, mixed use development
comprising 12 blocks including a hotel, library, retail,
leisure centre and residential accommodation at
Ballyhaunis, Co Mayo
OMahony Finnerty
developments in Sandymount,
Irishtown, Ballsbridge, Donabate, Clontarf, Malahide,
Fonthill Road, Longmile Road Airside, Clonshaugh and
Smithfield
Dermot McGlade, Catherine McGlade
Aiden Murphy
(receiver, Horwath Bastow Charleton)
Shandon Hotel at
Marble Hill, Portnablagh
John Grealish Fiona Grealish (wife), Brian McEnery
(receiver, Horwath Bastow Charleton ), Jona Investment
Holdings,Liam OConnell, Eglinton Taverns (The Cellar),
Kirwans Galway (Cuba and Bar 903) and Harvest Off
Licences Limited
Cellar Bar, Bar 903, Cuba nightclub
and the Harvest off licence chain (Woodquay, Ravens
Terrace, Oranmore and Moycullen)
Brody Sweeney
OBriens Irish Sandwiches, OBriens
Irish Sandwiches, Michael McAteer & Paul McCann
(receivers, Grant Thornton)
Christian Stokes, Simon Stokes
Auldcarn Limited,
James Luby (receiver, McStay Luby), Mayfair Properties,
Jeff Stokes (father), Pia Bang (mother), Unicorn, Thomas
Murray (liquidator), Springmanor, Giorgio Cassari Bang
Caf and Residence members club in Dublin,
John Flanagan Developments Limited

Mick Wallace M&J Wallace Limited, Sasha Wallace (son),


Wexford Youths FC Limited, Wexford Youths Football Club,
Wallace Calcio Limited, Wallace Imago Limited
property in the Dublin area, 70 properties in Dublin
city centre, Wellingtonbridge (Family home, south
Wexford,), infill developments in inner city districts,
including the Italian quarter at Ormond Quay (Dublin),
Ferrycarrig Sports Complex in his native Wexford, home to
Wallaces Wexford Youths soccer team, Behan Square
apartment complex on Russell Street near Croke Park , site
in Rathgar, Clontarf Road (family home, Dublin),
apartment in Turin (Italy)
Seamus Neville
two mixed developments
(apartments and offices) at Southwark in London and in
Nottingham, several landbanks in the greater Dublin area
when land was cheap. He paid 6.4 million in 1995 for the
140-acre Cherrywood estate where he has already built
and sold almost 700 homes.
Michael Lynch Limited
Seamus Lynch a 40m retail
park before Ennis Town Council
Noel Grealish Michael Grealish (brother), Galway Glass
Centre Limited 8,800 sq ft commercial unit at Briarhill
Business Park (Ballybrit, Galway), 15 acres of farmland at
Carnmore, Oranmore; an apartment, which serves as a
holiday home at Canet, France
Cathal Brady Cormore Investments Dublin Rathmines
Inn (Stout Bar) in Dublin and the Ardmore Inn in Bray, Co
Wicklow, pub in Cavan town, Audi and Hyundai
dealership in Cavan,
Ben Dunne
Dunnes Stores, Ben Dunne Gyms,
Barkisland (Developments) Limited, Barkisland
Developments Limited, Mark Dunne (son), Noel Smyth
Gyms at 52-54 Kimmage Road West (Dublin),
Blanchardstown Shopping Centre (Dublin), Northwood
Business Park, Santry Demense, Santry Dublin 9,
Ballyowen Lane, Lucan, Co Dublin, Twilfit House, Jervis
Street, Dublin City Centre
Darlington Properties Limited Kieran Wallace (KPMG,
receiver), Woodgreen Builders Limited, Sebastian Devlin
site at Ashbourne (Meath), lands at Killegland
(Meath), 89 houses at Betaghstown (Meath), 137 new
homes in the main street Dunshaughlin (Meath)

Philip Lynch
Eileen Lynch (wife), Judith Whelan
(daughter), Gerard Conlon, Therese Lynch (daughter),
Philippa Lynch (daughter), Paul Lynch (son), IAWS (now
called Aryzta), One51, Pascal Taggart, Larry Shields (LK
Shields solicitors)
86 acres in Kilbarry (Waterford)
Conor ClarksonClarkson Financial & Property, Financial
Engineering, Corpen, Eirjet
Gateway development in
Manchester, developments in Greater Manchester, London
and New York state, horses (Kicking King, Finger on the
Pulse)
Billy Kelly
Kellys Resort Hotel (Rosslare)
Jim Osborne
Castleway, Gulf Resources Development
and Investment (GRDI), Mohammed Salem AlMenhali, John
McCann, Shelbourne Developments Standard Chartered
Bank (Dubai), a hotel and retail development in
Damascus, anchored by a City Seasons Hotel
Patrick Cormody Construction Gearoid Costelloe (receiver,
Grant Thornton)
Cuddy Developments
Michael Butler (receiver, Butler
Reddy & Co), Sean Cuddy, Shane Cuddy
Wagala Pascal Power, Bernie OCallaghan, Mary Kearns,
Philip McBride, Bayview Hotel Killybegs,
Jim Hamilton (receiver, BDO) Bayview Hotel (Killybegs,
Donegal)
Denis OBrien Esat, Tony Ryan (Ryanair, decedent), Esat
Digifone consortium, Norwegian firm Telenor, Leslie
Buckley, Lucy Gaffney,Communicorp group, Sir Anthony
OReilly, Bank of Ireland, Digicel, Digicel Caribbean group ,
Fianna Fil adviser PJ Mara, accountant Greg Sparks, Denis
Danno OBrien (father), Dermot Desmond, Michael
Lowry, Paul Meagher, Conor Lenihan, Iris OBrien (mother),
Seamus Gallagher (decedent), Philip Lynch, Padraig O
hUiginn, Fred ODonovan, Catherine OBrien (wife, nee
Walsh), Independent News and Media, Frontline (charity),
Barry Maloney, Aergo Capital Limited, Safair, Aergo
Leasing 113 Limited Canada House (65-68 St Stephens
Green, Dublin), Quinto do Lago (family home, in Portugal,),
Classic Hits 98FM and radio stations in Poland and Prague,
Irish Independent, Sunday Independent (Ireland), 180
overseas newspaper titles, Today FM, Newstalk, Dublin
youth station Spin 103, and regional station Spin
SouthWest.

Peverel Vincent Tchenguiz


John Walsh
Marydean Properties Limited, Richard
Murphy, John McCabe, Paddy Kelly, Irish American
Management Services Ltd I LP (IAMSI), Irish American
Management Services LP (IAMS), Ren Gareau , Bussoleno
Limited Tinnahinch, Plunkett Avenue, Westminster Road,
Foxrock (family home), lands at Drogheda
Road,Termonfeckin, Co Louth, and 172 acres at Ballboghil
made up of two acres zoned residential and 170 acres
zoned agricultural Ballyboghil, Co Dublin, ommercial
investment properties at Gladstone Street, Clonmel, Co
Tipperary
Doyle Hotel group Bill Walsh The Westbury (Dublin), The
Croke Park Hotel (Dublin) and The River Lee Hotel (Cork)
John Farmer
Orana Group, GML Estates Limited, GML
(NI) Limited, Wyncote, Land Securities, Goodbody
Northern Ireland Property Fund
Bridgewater Park
Shopping Centre (Banbridge, Co Down), Gilford Mill in Co
Down, Commercial development at Crescent Link,
Derry/Londonderry
Albert Gubay Mardown, Total Fitness, Albert Gubay
Charitable Foundation, John Nugent 3 Guys supermarket,
Total Fitness gym sites in Dublin (Castleknock, the
Malahide Road and Sandyford)
Michael Stone Locket Connections, Designer Group
3
to 6 Parnell Street (Dublin)
Ravad PLC
Partam Properties and Investments (2007)
Limited, Celmus, Terentus Holdings SARL, Ravad UK
Limited, Ravad Trading Debentures Limited and Beit Agish
Ravad Limited, Egal Ahouvi , Yitzhak Tshuva, Delek Real
Estate, Gershon Salkind, Electra Real Estate Tesco store
(Roscrea)
Tiernan Properties Michael Tiernan,
Tesco store
(Roscrea), shopping centres at Arthurs Quay in Limerick
and other centres in Longford, Tuam and Athlone
Jackie Green Construction (Jackie Greene)
Brian
Greene
lands at College Drive, Terenure, Dublin
Graham Geraghty Amanda Geraghty (wife) plot of land
in Athboy
Monarch Property Castleknock Golf Club plc, Mariena
Properties Limited, L&C Properties Limited, Lagonda
Limited, M50 Motors Limited, Monarch Properties Services

Limited, Blackrock Business Park Limited, Monarch


Properties, Ringford Company Limited, Philip Monaghan
(Phil Monaghan, Philip Monahan, Phil Monahan), Liam
Carroll, Dunloe Ewart, Noel Smyth, Eddie Sweeney, Frank
Dunlop
Castleknock Golf Club, The Square in Tallaght
(Dublin), Shopping centres in Dundalk, Drogheda, Navan
and Athlone, Dublins Nutgrove and Janelle shopping
centres, 234 acres in Cherrywood (Carrickmines Valley,
south Dublin)
John Brennan Gwen Brennan (wife), Francis Brennan
(brother) Dromquinna Manor and 38 acres in Kenmare,
Park Hotel Kenmare
John Burke
Armada Hotel Holdings Limited
Armada
Hotel (Spanish Point, Co Clare)
Woodquay Properties Limited Thomas Kearney (Tom
Kearney) Bthar na mBan, Woodquay
Harte Holdings Barry Harte,Artesian Property Partnership,
Stein Group, Bird Group Royal Park Hotel (London),
Cranley Hotel and the Elizabeth Hotel
Tom Naughton Sean Healy, N17 Electrics Limited retail
and office units at Terryland retail park, Co Galway, to
construct an extension to the N17 superstore complex at
Milltown, Tuam, a 15-acre site at Ballymote, Co Sligo, 15
housing units at Ballymote, Bodane, Tuam (family home)
Tadhg Feeney Dominator Safe
Jerpoint West,
Thomastown, Co Kilkenny (family home)
Shelman Properties Joseph Gormley (director), Peter
Dwyer (director)
a 1.5 acre site in Clonee, Co Meath,
Clonee Court residential development (Clonee, Co Meath),
The Gallery, Turvey Walk, Donabate; and Amberwood,
Mulhuddart, Dublin 15.
Eric Whelan
Errisford Development Limited 119 Howth
Road development (52 unit complex, Dublin)
Michael Humphreys Adrian Dunne Capella Dunboy Castle
(aka Puxley Mansion, Castletownbere, Beara Peninsula)
Bacoro Developments
Bolterra, Bespoke Construction,
Aengus Burns and Michael McAteer (receivers, Grant
Thornton), Ronan Meeley, Barry Doyle and Cormac Lohan,
Niamh Meeley eco-friendly houses in Moate in Westmeath
Denis Heaney Brookview Developments, DAB
Developments farm at Garvagh (Co Derry), 20 hectares at
Drumahoe, near Londonderry

Airton Partnership Ray McGowan, John McCabe


Junction House (Airton Road, Tallaght, Dublin 24)
James Reynolds
Albert Reynolds (former taoiseach,
brother) 4, 6 and 8 Elgin Road (Dublin)
Joe Doyle Donnybrook Fair Group Food stores at
Stillorgan Shopping Centre (Dublin),.89 Morehampton
Road (Dublin), 13 Baggot Street (Dublin), Grattan Court
(Greystones, Dublin),
GEM Construction Martin Healy, Brian Loughran, GEM
Development, GEM Manufacturing Abbotts Hill, Malahide,
Clonfadda Wood, Mount Merrion Avenue (Dublin),, Beggars
Bush, Lansdowne, GEM Business Park (Athlone Road,
Longford, Co Longford)
Charlie McCreevy
Noeleen McCreevy (wife), Charlie
McCreevy (son)
property in Ladycastle (the K Club,
Straffan, Kildare), Millicent (family home, Kildare), office
property on the Kilcullen road, Naas
Fraser Houses Limited
Village Homes (NI) Limited
(Village Homes (Northern Ireland) Limited), Fred Fraser
(decedent), Alan Fraser (son), Paul Fraser (son),Iris
Robinson Nambarrie tea warehouse on Waring Street
(Belfast), Kellys Yard (Thorndale Park South, Carryduff),
Sandown Manor (Sandown Road, Belfast), Mayfield
development (Glengormley, Belfast), 87 acres in the
Cairnshill & Saintfield Road areas of South Belfast
John Kelly Jimmy Kelly (decedent, father), Margaret Kelly
(mother) Hazel Hotel (Monasterevin, Kildare)
James Reilly
Fine Gael, Dorothy Reilly (wife)
Laughton House (Moneygall, Co Offaly)
Tim Farrow
Real Estate Resolutions, Ballymore, Martin
Simms, St James, St James Homes 15,000 sq ft portion of
the Odeon Cinema site (Leicester Square, London)
Paul Hanby (solictor)
Fiona Hanby (wife), Gerard
Kinsella, Steamboat Developments Limited, Patricia
Kinsella, Paul Newman, MacDonagh Junction
Developments Limited (MJDL), Chesterbridge
Developments Limited, Michael Whelan Powerscourt
Springs Health Farm (Co Wicklow), MacDonagh Junction
Shopping Centre (Kilkenny)
Mooney family Armagh City Hotel Limited, Friary Road
Enterprises Limited, Dunadry Development Company
Limited, Mooney Hotel Group Wellington Park Hotel

(Malone Road, South Belfast), Dunadry Hotel (Dunadry, Co


Antrim), Armagh City Hotel (Armagh, Co Armagh)
Kinler Properties Limited John Curran, Kieran Haughey,
Fairhill Construction, Tiffen Developments
40 Linenhall
Street (Belfast), former Unipork factory (Enniskillen,
Fermanagh)
KARL group
KARL Holdings, KARL Airport Parking
Limited, Obel Living, KARL Properties, Aran Blackbourne,
Gail Blackbourne, Gayle Blackbourne
development at
Mucklagh (Co Offaly), Clonmeen Rise (Edenderry, Co
Offaly), Packenhamhall Road (Castlepollard, Co
Westmeath), Latt Hills (Co Cavan), Queens Parade
(Bangor, Co Down), Obel (Donegall Quay, Belfast), The
Courtyard (Castlereagh), Oldstone Manor (Muckamore, Co
Antrim), Karl Business Park (92 Old Ballyrobin Road,
Muckamore, Antrim),
Tysan Investments Denis OBrien, Paul Coulson, Gary
McGann, Pat Gunne, Sean Melly, Balcuik two office blocks
Sandyford industrial estate (Dublin)
Brian Hughes Paul Hughes
Abbeyglen Castle Hotel
(Clifden, Galway)
TLC Enterprises (T.L.C. Enterprises) a 15-storey apartment
at 101 Corporation Street (Belfast)
Lavery Diamond Partnership
243 flats and retail
and car parking at Corporation Street (Belfast)
Sean Devine The Devine Group, Dunlix Group, Michael
Lowry, GDLC Business Consultants Limited, Kevin Phelan,
Niall Devine
The Linen Green (Brooke Road, Co Tyrone),
Summerhill Park (Co Fermanagh), Rockhill (Co Down),
Seymour Court (Co Antrim), Urney Court (Co Tyrone),
Melvin Court (Co Tyrone), Victoria Manor (Co Tyrone),
Clones Road (Newtownbutler, Co Fermanagh), Lower Main
Street (Strabane, Co Tyrone), Roughan Road (Newmills, Co
Tyrone), Sydney Mews (Co Tyrone), Collaney (Co Sligo), Old
Ballymun Road (Co Dublin), Borrisokane (Co Tipperary),
Cabra (Thurles, Co Tipperary), Littleton (Co Tipperary),
Terryglass (Co Tipperary), Bolton City Centre (Lancashire),
Hull Industrial (Yorkshire), Motion Picture Centre (Aust,
Bristol)
Superquinn
Senator (2011, re-elected) Feargal Quinn,
Select Retail Holdings, Simon Burke, Kieran Ryan, Jerry
OReilly, David Courtney, Bernard Doyle, Terry Sweeney ,

Bernard McNamara,Andrew Street, Friends First, Simon


Cantrell Stores at Ballinteer, Blackrock, Blanchardstown,
Bray, Carlow, Charlesland, Clonmel, Finglas, Heuston
South Quarter, Killkenny, Knocklyon, Limerick, Lucan,
Northside, Portlaoise, Ranelagh, Rathborne, Rathgar,
Sundrive, Sutton, Swords, Tyrrelstown, Walkinstown,
Waterford
Bernard Hennessy Barry OCallaghan, Dominic Daly
Barley Cove Beach Hotel (Co Cork), Cliff House Hotel
(Ardmore, Co Waterford), Ryan Hotel in Killarney,
Castlemartyr College (Capella Hotel, Castlemartyr Resort,
Co Cork), Clonea Strand Hotel (Dungarvan, Waterford),
Tsarigradsko, Shousse Blvd, Sofia (Bulgaria), Analipsi,
Hersonnisis (Crete)
Barry OCallaghan Riverdeep Holdings PLC Cliff House
Hotel (Ardmore, Waterford)
James Jordan
Laochfail, Outfarm Lane, Castleknock,
Dublin (family home), 1.7 acre piece of land at Outfarm
Lane (Dublin), ommercial property in Coolmine Industrial
Estate in Blanchardstown, nvestment property at Eden
Court, Dunshaughlin, Co Meath, two commercial
properties at Base Park, Mulhuddart, investment property
at Charlemont Place in Dublin 2
Beannchor
Bill Wolsley, Wen Inns
Groomsport Inn
and sister pub The Stables, the Hillside in Hillsborough,
Lisbarnett House near Lisbane and the Esplanade in
Ballyholme, Bangor, Merchant Hotel in Belfasts Cathedral
Quarter, The Dirty Onion close to the Merchant (Belfast)
Joe Sheehan
James Sheehan (son), CMC Medical
Operations, Kieran Wallace (liquidator, KPMG), Sheehan
Medical Cork Medical Centre (Mahon Point)
DJ Carey Sarah Newman (partner), Patrick ODonohoe
(partners ex-husband), needahotel.com 908 Ladycastle,
The K Club, Straffan, Co Kildare, and 5 The Inch, Mount
Juliet, Co Kilkenny, 821 Ladycastle, The K Club, Straffan,
Co Kildare, Alma Road, Monkstown, Co Dublin (family
home), 10.5m chalet in Zermatt (Switzerland)
Declan Fagan, Bernadette Fagan
Temple Spa Limited
Temple House, Horseleap, Moate (Co Westmeath)
Michael OHiggins T OhUiginn and Comhlucht Teoranta
lands at Rahoon (Galway), Ceann Boirne, Taylors Hill,
Galway (family home)

Donie Cassidy Belvedere Hills Limited, the Seanad


Belvedere Hills (Mullingar, Co Westmeath)
Sean Flanagan John Burke
Readstown, Summerhill, Co
Meath (family home), lands at East Wall near Dublins
Docklands development
Joe McNamara
Dun na Carraige, Blackrock, Co
Galway
The Layden Group Joe Layden
Boole House in
Clonskeagh, Dublin 4, 29 retail branches and one call
centre of Bank of Ireland
Mervyn McElroy
Emma McElroy (wife), Lough Shore
Development property in counties Fermanagh and
Donegal, including a 34-acre site at Ball Hill in Donegal
where they had been planning to build a six star hotel and
marina
John Kent Kentech, Michael Francis Kent (Michael Kent),
Sarah Kent
Marlfield (Clonmel, Co Tipperary)
Jim TreacyJohn Hansen and Stuart Irwin of KPMG, Castle
Hume Leisure a Supervalu at Churchtown in Dublin.,
Lough Erne Resort (Enniskillen, Fermanagh,)
Desmond Nugent
Sarcon No 177 Limited the James
Clow building (Belfast)
Paddy Byrne Barrack Construction, Simon Coyle
(receivers, Mazars), Barrack Homes and Better Living
two sites in Newbridge, Abbyfield (Ballitore, Kildare)
two premises in Newbridge, New Brighton (Wirral,
Liverpool)
John Morrissey Carol Nolan (wife), Tom Kavanagh
(receiver, Kavanagh Fennell), Guinness Peat Aviation
(GPA), Domhnal Slattery, International Aviation
Management Group, Havok, Capital D, Tony ORiordan, D
246 (D246), Dermot Desmond, Electricity Supply Board
chairman Lochlann Quinn, technology entrepreneur Bill
McCabe and former Voluntary Health Insurance chief
Vincent Sheridan, Malakoff, Brian Hyland (liquidator, Baker
Tilly Ryan Glennon) Palmerston Road (Family home,
Dublin), properties in Ranelagh, Rathgar, Rathmines and
Monkstown in Dublin, and properties in Kildare and Clare,
unit at Park West Business Park, Dublin, share portfolio
account with Bloxham Stockbrokers
Pierse Desmond Limited Patrick Pierse, Daniel McAteer 53
acres of registered land in Kerry

CRF Developments Limited


Colin Fletcher, Paul
Fletcher, Cyril Fletcher
shop units on Portstewart
promenade and houses in Portrush and Portstewart.
OConnors Shopping Centre Limited
Rory OConnor
Nenagh Shopping Centre Complex (Nenagh,
Tipperary)
Shafin Developments
Patrick Horkan (receiver, KPMG),
Shane Filan (Westlife), Finbarr Filan (brother) a number of
developments in Leitrim (Dromahair, Co Leitrim) and Sligo
Cavan Hotel & Leisure Company
Kieran Wallace
(receiver, KPMG)
Cavan Crystal Hotel
Corner Blok
Colin Conn, Box Architects, Paul Durnien
Four Corners Hotel (Waring Street and Donegall
Street, Belfast)
Carlisle Property Developments Limited
Athletic
Stores, Queen Street (Belfast)
John Gallagher Neil Mather (administrator, Begbies
Traynor) Allens West Logistics Centre (Tees Valley,
England)
Chris Musgrave
Wynard Park Limited
Allens West
Logistics Centre (Tees Valley, England), Wynard Park
(Hartlepool, England)
Manse LLP
David Mitchell, Alex Price and Ray Palmer
Allens West Logistics Centre (Tees Valley, England)
Westfield Hermes Castlecourt Shopping Centre (Belfast),
Sprucefield Shopping Centre (Lisburn), Westfield Shopping
Centre (Shepherds Bush, London)
Lanark Homes Limited
sites on the Shankill Road,
Merkland Place off the Springfield Road and at Glenbryn
Park (Belfast), Ranfurly Avenue and Maxwell Road (Bangor)
Christopher Keegan Greenscheme, David Madden &
Associates
Greystones Junction Business Park
(Greystones, Wicklow)
Richard Quirke
Dr Quirkeys Emporium (arcade and
casino OConnell Street, Dublin), Casino resort (Tipperary)
Pembroke Estates John Finnegan (decedent)
Keco Construction Limited
Tom Doheny (receiver,
Deloitte & Touche), Eugene Keane, Michael Cotter, Curley
Holdings and bank contained around 50 acres of
development land
Clementine Developments
BDO (receiver), Declan
Rodgers Pats Bar (Belfast), The Rotterdam bar (Belfast),

112 apartments The Olympic (Belfast)


Younger Homes
the Hawthornes in Maghera
where it built more than 100 homes
Abatewood
Jim Clery, Sean Mooney, David Wilkinson,
Etaba, KPMG Tesco warehouse in Donabate in north
Dublin
Emerald Isle Properties Liam Hazel, Margaret Ann Hazel,
Greenville Properties
eight sites at Reendesert
(Ballylickey in West Cork)
John Grayken Lone Star, Ellis Short
KEB (South
Korean bank), Sarah Fergusons property at Virginia Water
(Surrey, UK), house off of Bond Street (London)
Signature Capital
Ciaran McNamara, Enda Woods
Neumarkt shopping centre (Cologne, Koln, Germany),
assets in Germany, Britain and the United States
Ray ByrneJane English (wife) Caf en Seine (Dublin),
Howl at the Moon (Dublin), the George (Dublin) the Plaza
Hotel (Dublin), The Ice House (Ballina, Mayo), Phoenicia
Hotel (Malta)
Leslie Allen-Vercoe Rhymer Investments, Irish Nationwide
Building Society
Updown Court (country house,
Windlesham, Surrey)
McGinley Construction
Tom Kavanagh (receivers,
Kavanagh Fennell), Hugh McGinley apartments in the East
Wall Road area, 31 apartments at Auburn Lodge (off
Church View Road, Killiney in south Dublin), land at
Ravensdale Road in Dublin
Joe Linders
Patrick Linders, Naltmore, Orpinhall
Services, John Prior, Bernard Strahan, Paul Linders,
Anthony Weldon (liquidators, Kieran Ryan &Co), Fusano
Properties, John Flynn, Paddy Kelly, Linders of Smithfield
former Irish Distillers headquarters in Smithfield,
Gloucester Square development in Dublin city centre, car
dealership in Chapelizod in Dublin.
Eithne Scott-Lennon John Fitzpatrick (brother) Fitzpatricks
Killiney Castle hotel (Dublin), two Fitzpatrick hotels in New
York
Brendan Gildea
Tessie Gildea (wife), Brendan Gildea
Limited, Myles Kirby (receivers, Martin Ferris & Associates)
Brookside Villas, Magherennan, Letterkenny, Co
Donegal (family home),
Andrew Blair 1677933 Ontario Limited,MBC Capital

Corporation (MBC Capital), , TMG the Marine Group Inc


(the Marine Group), Sheldon Mintzberg Bayview Heights
Drive, Toronto, Canada (family home),Straffan House,
Kildare Golf and Country Club, Co Kildare (family home,
Sheldon Mintzberg)
John Turley and Co Turley Properties
Bill Cullen Jackie Lavin, Irish Youth Foundation, Dublin
Airport Authority
Muckross Park Hotel (Killarney, Kerry),
The Apprentice (Irish edition)
Silverwood Developments
Margaret Heffernan, Frank
Dunne (brother)
offices on South Great Georges Street
(Dublin)
Martin Keane Vera Keane
Blooms Hotel (Temple Bar,
Dublin), Oliver St John Gogarty pub (Temple Bar, Dublin),
24 Merrion Square
Gandon Property
Darragh Harte and Gerard Wycherly
office at Amiens Street (Dublin)
Ballybrit Partnership John Hughes, Thomas Browne Galway
city centre property
Lis Cara Partnership Gerry Deane, Patsy Donegan offices
in Carrick-on-Shannon (Leitrim)
Mealey Murphy Fleming Partnership
offices in Carlow
Michael Fogarty
Rocktop Holdings Limited Roscrea
Temporary Decent Office (leased to Equality Authority),
Caislean Cuirt (Cabra Road, Thurles)
Johnny Moran David Hughes/Luke Charleton (receivers,
Ernst & Young), JRM Hotels Limited, Blarney Inns Limited
Holiday Inn (Pearse Street, Dublin), The Blarney Inn
and Earl of Kildare Hotel (Kildare Street), Herbert Lodge
(Family home, Merrion Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin)
KB Developments
Carrickcroppen Hill development
(Camlough, County Armagh)
Broomhill Land Securities Gerard McKernan, Dakota
Properties Limited, Clubstohire LLP, Two Five Two
Management Company (No 1) Limited, Two Five Two
Management Company (No 2) Limited site at Victoria
Road in east Belfast
Wilson and Mawhinney (Wilson & Mawhinney)
site at
Glenville Road, Newtownabbey
ADH (Ireland) (ADH Ireland Limited)
site at Glenville
Road, Newtownabbey, a Sealine SC38 powerboat, site at
North Queen Street in Belfast

M & I Developments (M and I Developments)


site at
Victoria Road in east Belfast
Frank Kilbride, Enda Sheridan FJ Gearty & Co, Mondora
Limited, Sonya Tighe (receiver, FGS), Mayor of Co Longford
development in Granard (Longford)
Michael Carey, David Andrews, Michael Tunney
Jacob
Fruitfield, Kieran Wallace and Cormac OConnor (receivers,
KPMG), Westport Investment Property Fund plc, Avid
Investments and Kasumi, Lioncourt Capital
properties at
Belgard Road and Blessington Road in Tallaght, Dublin, as
well as property in Drogheda and land in the North
McDonogh Properties
Thomas McDonogh & Sons,
Thomas McDonogh, Tom McDonogh (son)
several
properties in Belgium, European Commission building
(Avenue de Beaulieu, Brussels.), office park outside Namur
(Belgium), office block (Lyons, France), Dockgate (Galway),
Queensgate (Galway)
GMR Lesiure Holding Limited Brian OConnell, Shannon
Airport Authority, Limerick County Golf & Country Club
Limited, Balyneety Sports Management Limited
Limerick County Golf & Country Club (Ballyneety,
Limerick)
Cattan Developments
Brian OConnell, Shannon Airport
Authority, Limerick County Golf & Country Club Limited,
Balyneety Sports Management Limited Glas na Habhainn
(Carrick-on-Shannon), 20 house development in Drumlish
(Longford), Waterfront, Tarmonbarry, Co. Roscommon
BJ Eastwood (Barney Eastwood)
Frances Eastwood
(wife), Fearghal Eastwood (son), Brian Eastwood (son),
Stephen Eastwood (son), Castlebawn consortium
(Castlebawn Limited), Adam Armstrong, Barry McGuigan,
Bill Rush (William Rush), Eastwood Property, R&A Group,
Wildrose (Magheralave), Ladbrokes 8,000 sq metre
supermarket on land off the Magheralave Road (Lisburn,
Co Antrim), Castlebawn retail development in
Newtownards, Co Down, Peter Robinson advice centre in
North Street, Newtownards (Co Down), Tower Centre
(Ballymena)
Pat McCormack
Birchsilver, Donegall Place
Investments
Cafe Vaudeville bar (Belfast city centre),
Bloomfield shopping centre (Bangor), Bow Street Mall
(Lisburn)

Cloughorr Investments Peter Wilson


Kellys Nightclub
(Portrush) (Lush at Kellys Portrush), holiday home parks,
Golf Links Hotel (Portrush) (Cloughorr House Hotel)
Ken Campbell Iris Robinson, Belfasts Titanic Quarter, J&K
Campbell a housing development in Newtownards, 12
North Street (Newtownards), Belfasts Titanic Quarter
Sperrin Homes Contactors Limited sites at Washing Bay
Road (Coalisland), Loughview Court, Ballybrack Road
(Loughmacrory), six sites at the Victoria Gate
development in Derry
Paul Tiernan
Hazkarl Properties, Linders family house
at Churchfields (K Club, Straffan, Kildare), 143-bedroom
hotel between Gardiner Street and Amiens Street (Dublin)
Ken Cheevers Trench Holdings, McLaughlin and
Harvey,Barr Construction basketball arena for the London
Olympics, the 50m redevelopment of Loch Ryan port in
Scotland
Gilbert Ash (Gilbert-Ash) Gilbert-Ash Fitout Ltd, Eddie
ONeill, Mark Nutt, Gerry Hughes, Ray Hutchinson,
Raymond Gilroy,John Wilson, John Hart, Gilbert-Ash
Conservatories Lyric theatre (Belfast), Victoria Square
(Belfast), Riverside Housing (Antrim), Central Park
(Adelaide Street, Belfast), Scrabo Glen and Scrabo Manor
(Belfast)
H&J Martin
William G Martin (William Martin, Bill
Martin), Derek Martin, Timothy Martin, BIH Social
Development (McAuley Street, Belfast), Cloisters
(University Avenue, Belfast), Richview Court (Donegal
Road, Belfast)
Need More Space
DMG Group, Tom Hefferon
Deansgrange office in Dublin.
Merrion Property Group Michael Roden, Mark Roden,
Morgan Stanley
Down Royal racecourse and golf club
in Lisburn, 24-acre site in Mount Merrion, house on
Wellington Road (Dublin), 300 ex army homes in Ballykelly
(Limavady, Derry), Canadian embassy (Strathmore Road,
Killiney)
Suneil Sharma
Parkway Valley site (Limerick), Opera
shopping centre (Limerick), retail park at Childers Road
(Limerick)
Vernotico Developments Limited
Mary Collins, Patrick
Collins
Glenall (Borris-in-Ossory, Borris in Ossory, Laois)

Gerry OHare (Dr Gerard OHare)


Parker Green
International, Special Olympics Ireland Quays Shopping
Centre (Newry),Drumalane Mill (Newry) Fairgreen
Shopping Centre (Carlow)
Dijit Rana (Lord Rana)
Andras House, Rajesh Rana,
Ramesh Rana Cordia Apartments (south Belfast), Ibis
Belfast Queens Quarter (Belfast), Ibis Belfast City Centre
(Belfast), Days Hotel (Belfast City Centre), Ramada Plaza
Shaws Bridge (Belfast), Holiday Inn Express (Belfast)
Edward Lonergan
Deramore Holdings, Deramore
Property Group 121-123 Princes Street (Edinburgh), 12-15
High Street (Winchester), 48-76 St Johns Road (Clapham,
London), 62 Princes Street (Edinburgh), 130-140 Buchanan
Street (Glasgow), 7-11 Castle Lane, (Belfast), Fountain
House (Donegall Place, Belfast), Queens Square (Crawley,
UK), 32,34,36 Shandwick Place (Edinburgh), 32-33 Petty
Cury (Cambrige), Wallace Buildings (Wallace Avenue,
Lisburn), Connswater Shopping Centre (Belfast),
Bloomfield Shopping Centre (Bangor), Omagh Retail Park
(Omagh), Arthur Street/Castle Lane (Belfast), 55 High
Street (Kings Lynn, UK), Avenue House (Royal Avenue,
Belfast), Dudley Street (Wolverhampton)
Shamus Jennings
Francis Jennings (brother), Ballyrogan
Holdings Cromwell Hospital (London)
Beltrae Partners
Ian Kerr, Conor McCullough, David
McCloy, Patrick Spain, Greg Hamill, James Mairs, Wooster
Investments Limited, Chef Investments Limited,
700+
housing units aimed at indigenous residents (Romania),
retail development in Boucher Road, Belfast, property
investment in Belfast, Caravan park in County Down
acquired for development
James OToole, Thomas OToole
8-acre
development at Main Street (Carnew, Wicklow)
Richard Farrington Simon Coyle (receiver, Mazars)
Block 1 in Clanwilliam Court, Lower Mount Street,
Dublin 2
Michael Quilligan (Mick Quilligan) Simon Sammy
Buckshot Quilligan (Simon Quilligan, father) estate at
Ballywilliam North (Rathkeale, Limerick)
Richard OBrien
Castle Park estate (Rathkeale,
Limerick)
Neil Loftus
Wynns Hotel (Lower Abbey Street,

Dublin), Clarence Hotel (Wellington Quay, Dublin)


Herdman family
Herdmans Mill (Sion Mill, County
Tyrone)
The Dunraven Arms Hotel Limited Dunraven Arms Hotel
(Adare, Limerick)
Temple Gate Hotel Limited
Madden family Temple Gate
hote (Ennis, Co Clare)
Prentice Estates Limited
the Causeway Exchange
office building (Belfast city centre)
London and Regional Properties
Niall Gunne
Eircom
exchange building (Citiwest, Co Dublin), block on
Clanwilliam Place (Dublin)
Killarney Hotels
Liebherr Hotels (Switzerland) The
Europe Hotel and Resort (Fossa, Killarney, Kerry),Dunloe
Castle Hotel (Killarney), Ard Na Sidhe hotel (Kerry),
Central Craigavon Limited
Moyallen Properties Limited,
Granville Food Care Limited, CCSMS Limited, Magowan
Management Services Limited, Moyallen Holdings Limited,
Moyallen Developments Limited, Rushmere NI Limited,
SAgaro Properties Limited, Peter Robinson, John Robinson
Rushmere shopping centre (Craigavon), Magowan
Buildings development in Portadown and the Granville
Food Care warehousing business
Carnville Developments OHare and McGovern, Carnbane
House group, Solas Education for Life consortium six
third level education institutions (Ireland)
Cessona Limited
John Kenneally Shebeen Chic (South
Great Georges Street, Dublin)
Sean GallagherDerek Roddy, Smart Homes (SmartHomes),
Beach House Training and Consulting Limited 20 houses at
Gyles Quay near Dundalk, Co Louth
Michael Holland
Fitzwilliam hotel (St Stephens
Green, Dublin 2), Fitzwilliam hotel (Great Victoria Street,
Belfast)
Martin Garvin
Andrews Lane Theatre (Andrews
Lane, Dublin 2)
Declan Walsh Bridget Walsh Alverstoke (Bray Road,
Foxrock, Dublin)
Paul Kemsley Rock Investment Holdings PLC 30 Marsh
Wall (London E14), the former Burberry HQ on Haymarket,
Selhurst Park football ground in London, as well as a
number of assets in the US including offices on Fifth

Avenue in New York


John Morgan EstatesMelville and Co Funeral Directors Ltd,
Morgan Document Security, Morgan family
Balloo Retail
Park (Bangor, Co Down)
Benmore Group
Benmore Developments Co-op
Funeral Service building (Morrison Street, Glasgow),
Adelaide Exchange building (Belfast), Westwood shopping
centre (Belfast), Rushmere House (Cadogan Park, south
Belfast)
Rockridge Developments Limited Michael Keaveney,
Bridget Dunne-Keaveney (Bridget Dunne, Bridget
Keaveney)
1.8 acre site at Glenamuck Road,
Carrickmines, Co. Dublin, 1 Hillcrest Heights, Lucan, Co.
Dublin
Samuel Moore Li Developments, Moore Associates (NI),
SHM Group, SH Moore and Sons Limited, Colliers
International (receivers) Main Street (Pomeroy, County
Tyrone), Dervock (county Antrim), Fivemiletown (county
Tyrone), properties in Portadown, Coleraine, Cookstown,
Armoy, Kells, Mosside, Clough and
Castlecaufield.apartment building in Ballymena (county
Antrim)
Ben Walsh
CG Hotels Limited Great Southern hotels
at Dublin, Cork (Radisson Blu) and Shannon (Park Inn)
Brian Moran
Deirdre Lemass (wife), Johnny Ronan, John
Ronan Junior, Neway Investments Limited, Hornbill
Limited, Academy Geographic Limited, Ardquade Limited,
Lanaree Limited, Rosebrook Limited, Woodreed
Investments Limited, Castle Cove Property Developments
Limited, Ardquade Wines Limited, Canora Limited, Malting
Tower Limited, Carlton Lane Limited, Linconna Limited,
Okolan Limited,Buildonline, Urban Capital, Hines
Eamonn McCann
Sultan Properties Limited, Wonderland
Promotions, KPMG (administrators) Wheafsheaf Centre in
Rochdale (Greater Manchester)
Langan family Barina Construction, Tadhg Langan (Tadgh
Langan), Gerard Langan (Ger Langan)
Mayeston Hall
(Finglas, Dublin), Primrose Gate (Celbridge, Kildare),
Hamilton Hall ( Dunboyne, Co Meath)
Herd Estates
high street shop units in towns across
the UK, A wind farm at Cornharrow (Dumfries, Scotland),
luxury homes in Belfast and Donaghadee, 500-acre estate

in Scotland
John McGreevy Hugh McGreevy Sons, Tom McGreevy, Hugh
McGreevy, Bernard McGreevy the Grove at Hansted off
the Newcastle Road in Lucan, Co Dublin, Redcourt in
Clontarf, Fforster Square, Esker Park and Elmbrook in
Lucan and Ashcroft in Raheny
Latlorcan Developments WJ Dolan Construction (Ireland)
houses in Monaghan town
May Estates
Russell Simpson Construction business
parks and office blocks
Eddie Hobbs Brendan Investment Pan European Property
plc, Vincent Regan, Hugh ONeill, Dermot Flanagan,
Brendan Investments Property Management Ltd
office
building in the Airport City business park in Dusseldorf
(Germany)
David Hassard Ravenblack Developments
a 5.75 acre
development site in Derriaghy near Belfast and a 2.2 acre
site at Cumnock in the west of Scotland, Gocean Lodge in
Killyleagh (county Down)
Joseph Rodney Williamson
Rodney Williamson
Developments. developments in Richhill (Co Armagh)
Patrick J Doherty
Newbay, Newbay Doherty Properties,
Patrick J Doherty & Son Ltd
Letterkenny Retail Park,
Sligo Retail Park, Coshclady (Derrybeg, county Donegal,
company HQ), An Chuirt Hotel and Leisure Centre
(Gweedore, county Donegal), Ballymacool Housing Estate
(Letterkenny, Donegal), development at Cotteen
(Derrybeg, Donegal), development at Meenderrygamph
(Gweedore, county Donegal) and Falcarragh (Letterkenny,
Donegal)
Lagan Group Kevin Lagan, Michael Lagan (brother)
Philip Johnston East Development Company Ltd, PwC
(receivers), Haz Properties Limited and Haz Investments
Ltd, Philip Johnston and Co Estate Agents
residential
and commercial property portfolio in Northern Ireland,
Scotland and England
Michael Lowry (politician) Abbeygreen Consulting Limited
Well, the gloves are coming off! This letter (or similar) has just
recently been sent out to a few of the early Nama developers.
I have always maintained that the end game between the
developers and Nama would relate to Personal Guarantees.
I would not say that battle is engaged yet, but this does look like
one of the first shots or maybe its just a probing reconnoiter by

Nama.
The developers reaction will be interesting. One would assume that
most wives are independent citizens and have rights as such.
Therefore it is hard to see on what basis Nama can demand
personal and financial information on them from a husband. I would
think that many will seek independent legal representation. It will
be intriguing to see how this plays out.
Re: Unencumbered assets / asset transfers
Dear -,
I refer to the statement of affairs in respect of XXX and the listing of
property transfers which you submitted to us as part of the recent
business plan submission.
To finalise this information, NAMA requires that xxx principals
submit a final, signed, comprehensive and itemised listing of all
asset transfers to connected parties (including spouses and other
family connections if applicable) over the past five years. This list
should detail the date of transfer and where relevant, the
consideration paid.
In addition, NAMA requires a final. signed and comprehensive listing
of all assets currently held for each of the principals, and separately
for each of their spouses. The listing of assets should be itemised ,
subject to a financial threshold of 10k for personal assets and
house contents, and should include a full breakdown of all
properties, cash, personal assets, house contents and all other
assets, detailed by the partnership, corporate entity and trust in
which they have a beneficial interest or in their own name. A
description, estimated valuation and details of any related debt
should be provided in respect of each asset.
The principals and spouses are reminded that NAMA may at any
time seek sworn affidavits in respect of the statements of affairs or
asset transfers.
Yours sincerely,
Portfolio Asset Manager
National Asset Management Agency
Bernard McNamara was widely reported as one of the NAMA Top 10
developers whose loans were absorbed by the agency in the first
tranche in May 2010. The man himself is one of the best known
developers in the State having built a vast property empire which
encompassed some of the best known hotels in the State, not to
mention prestigious residential developments and shopping centres.
It is perhaps a sad reality that he might have become best known
as the face of the disastrous Irish Glass Bottle development, mostly
due to the litigation that has surrounded him in relation to that site
(and because the other partners in the development Derek
Quinlan keeps a low profile in London/Switzerland and the Dublin

Docklands Development Authority has been cleansed of its former


top management and no-one dare say a bad word about current
chairwoman, Niamh Brennan).
As with all NAMA developers, Bernard will have submitted a
business plan to the agency and there will have been some
subsequent dialogue to assess how best the loans could be repaid.
Though not confirmed by NAMA, I understand that NAMA is placing
a cap of 192,000 (not 200,000) on salaries to be paid to
developers. Bernard of course didnt get to where he is (or was)
today by sitting around waiting for events to unfold and recent
reporting has suggested he is building a business in the Middle East
where his talents might be better rewarded. And there is some
speculation as to what happened this week with mixed reporting on
the receivership of the Michael McNamara and Company
construction company. Earlier reporting (and here) suggested that it
was Bernard himself that sought a voluntary receivership whereas
reporting today (and here) suggests that NAMA is pulling the strings
and that it was NAMA that placed the company in receivership.
Indeed both RTE and the Independent are highlighting what is a
milestone event in NAMAs growth into its full functionality the
first time NAMA has used its powers under Chapter 3 of the NAMA
Act to appoint a receiver.
Michael McNamara and Company is regarded as the flagship
construction company in Bernards empire. Founded in Lisdoonvarna
in 1948 and bearing the name of Bernards father the company was
incorporated in 1964 as an unlimited company and does not publish
accounts it has a long history in residential, commercial and public
sector construction. Today it is reported to employ 400 people
directly and including subcontractors it is estimated that 1,100
people may be depending on the company. The construction
industry in Ireland employed an estimated total of 125,300 at the
end of June 2010 and with the recent failure of Pierse Contracting
and with McInerneys future uncertain, the sector seems to be
facing a bleak immediate future.
Although a key part of the Bernard McNamara empire, Bernard had
stepped back from day to day involvement in the company earlier
this year. Elsewhere his group is facing an uncertain future with
debts reported at 1.5bn. Yesterday another prominent group
company Radora Developments Limited (developer of the Elmpark
Green Urban Quarter on Merrion Road in Dublin) was on the
receiving end of a winding up petition by ACC Bank (local subsidiary
of Hollands Rabobank). What next for other companies in the
McNamara group? Including Grattan Properties, Varleigh, Breydon
Developments.
UPDATE: 15th November, 2010. Siobhan Creaton in the
Independent claims that On Thursday, Farrell Grant Sparks was
appointed to take control of the business. It has shut down the

companys [Michael McNamara Construction thats the company


identified in the preceding paragraph and the company to which
FGS has been appointed receiver] sites, laid off half of its 110 staff,
and the receiver will shortly put the companys assets on the
market. That company owes more than 20m to creditors and
subcontractors. It had made profits of 6m in the previous six
months and had not been seeking funding from NAMA to continue
its work. Could Siobhan be confusing Radora with Michael
McNamara Construction?
UPDATE: 21st November, 2010. With a key hearing tomorrow where
Radoras future will be decided by the courts, it is being reported by
the Independent that the receiver to Michael McNamara and
Company is wasting no time in putting the assets up for sale. The
assets include the work in progress on several major state contracts
with which the company was involved.
UPDATE: 26th November, 2010. There was supposed to have been a
winding up application hearing last Monday 22nd November in
respect of Friends First/ACC Banks claims on Bernard McNamaras
Radora Developments, possibly best known for its mixed-use
development of Elm Park in Ballsbridge. No news of that but the
Independent today is claiming that NAMA is appointing a receiver,
likely to be FGS (Farrell Grant Sparks ), to this major McNamara
group company. There would appear to be still quite a few unsold
high-end apartments in the development which at the peak saw
two-bed apartments on offer for 585,000. Dont be surprised to
see these offloaded at 200-250k in a NAMA firesale.
UPDATE: 18th December, 2010. The Independent reports that
McNamaras Varleigh and Breydon have fallen to the receivers. In
both cases, it was non-NAMA financial institution Ulster Bank that
pulled the plug and PwC appears to have been appointed receiver
for both. NAMA has of course had receivers appointed to Michael
McNamara and Company Construction and to Radora Developments.
UPDATE: 12th December, 2011. It is reported in todays Irish
Examiner that a receivers report has been lodged with the
Companies Registration Office which reportedly shows that the
receiver, Declan Taite has realised 3.15m in asset sales.

CONTROVERSIAL property tycoons, Liam Carroll and


Bernard McNamara are pocketing millions for property
they rent to the state almost 117 million each year.
As well as paying rent to Mr Carroll and Mr McNamara, the
taxpayer has also had to take on responsibility for the
loans the property developers have transferred to NAMA.
According to new figures released by the Office of Public
Works (OPW), Liam Carroll earns a total of almost 8m on
17 leases he has with the state his leases and rental bill
has actually increased since January of last year.

The embattled property developer lost control of his Zoe


group of companies last year following a series of
prolonged and high-profile court proceedings. The group
was estimated to have owed some 1.3 billion to its
bankers.
Mr Carroll and his wife Roisn hold six leases, earning them
just over 4m. Five of the leases are based in 26-30 Upper
Abbey Street.
advertisement

Two of these leases are currently vacant and are costing


the taxpayer 1.6m per year.
The Civil Service Commission rents a further two spaces,
earning Mr and Mrs Carroll 672,175 and 1.2m every
year respectively.
Mr Carrolls company Danninger Ltd holds eight leases,
earning in the region of 3.2m from a number of
properties around Dublin.
Tenants include the Department of Social and Family
Affairs, the Department of Justice and Law Reform, the
Road Safety Authority, the Department of Agriculture and
the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Property developer Bernard McNamara whose loans
have been taken over by NAMA is also a landlord to the
state.
Well-known in Fianna Fil circles as a former party
councillor in the 1970s, Mr McNamaras company Belltrap
Ltd earns 4.1m for three leases to the Department of
Justice and Law Reform, the Department of Social and
Family Affairs and Revenue.
Breydon Developments, which Mr McNamara partly owns,
receives 188,553.
Other high-profile businessmen such as beef baron, Larry
Goodman, and property developer, John Byrne, have also
earned millions from having the state as a tenant.
Mr Byrne earns more than 5.7m on nine leases he has

with the state.


His company Alstead Securities earns just over 3.3m on a
number of properties on Parnell Square in Dublin, occupied
by the Department of Enterprise Trade and Innovation, the
Director of Corporate Enforcement, the Department of
Social and Family Affairs and the National Social and
Economic Development Office.
Carlisle Trust Ltd earns 1.3m while Dublin City Estates
earns just over 1m.
Beef baron Larry Goodmans leases earn him 3.7m on
the Setanta Centre on Nassau Street in Dublin.
One of his companies Hazeldale receives over 1m for the
use of 76-78 Harcourt Street in Dublin, while his firm
Halfpipe receives 1.26m for the use of 4-5 Harcourt Road
in Dublin.
Heading the list is Irish Life Assurance which earns a
staggering 11.8m on leases it has with a range of
Government departments.

THE High Court is to withdraw protection


from the troubled construction firm,
McInerney Group, from Friday, February
25, after rejecting a proposed rescue package
22/02/2011

Mr Justice Frank Clarke yesterday said that a proposed


investor in the firm -- US hedge fund, OakTree -- had
engaged in an abuse of process by attempting to increase
its offer for the Irish firm after the court had indicated its
judgment on the rescue package last Thursday.
The examiner yesterday brought the court's attention to an
improved offer from OakTree.
The US fund had offered to increase its offer for
McInerney's by 6.6m.
This followed Mr Justice Clarke's ruling last week that one
of McInerney's bankers, KBC, would be unfairly
prejudiced under a rescue package because it did not have
access to the NAMA scheme.
OakTree's increased offer for McInerney's -- which would
have included a significant cash sum for KBC -- was aimed
at specifically addressing the issue of unfair prejudice. The

rescue package would have allowed the firm to exit


examinership but only after its debts had largely been
written off.
KBC currently holds a 26pc stake in the construction
firm's liabilities.
Unlike Bank of Ireland and Anglo Irish Bank, the other
banks in the McInerney syndicate, KBC does not come
under the terms of NAMA.
Mr Justice Clark yesterday said that OakTree could have
increased their offer at any stage -- but, by doing so after
the High Court had indicated its judgment on the rescue
package, effectively engaged in an abuse of process.
"The court is not part of a negotiating process," he said.
On application, he said he would remove the court's
protection from McInerney's -- but granted a stay on the
order until 2.30pm on Friday. If no appeal is signalled,
receivers would then be appointed.
McInerneys -- one of Ireland's oldest building firms -employs 280 workers but, like other firms, has been badly
hit by the recession and property market collapse.
It now owes more than 110m to a syndicate of three
banks, Anglo Irish, Bank of Ireland and KBC and has been
in court-approved examinership for the past year.
Last week, Mr Justice Clarke said that NAMA had declined
to make its position clear on the McInerney Group.
However, the judge said that it was "quite likely" that
NAMA would get involved in McInerney's, given its
property-related debts.

Court Will Hear McInerney


Appeal Soon
As I noted in this weeks preview, the McInerney Homes group of
companies has appealed from the High Courts decision to
terminate the examinership that was protecting the group from its
creditors. (The NAMA Wine Lake blog has been following the case
here). Naturally, the group has applied for a continuation of the

protection from creditors pending the appeals outcome; without


such a stay, the appeal would quickly be rendered meaningless.
The application for a stay pending appeal was listed on todays
motion list before Hardiman, Finnegan and ODonnell JJ.
But when the parties appeared in Court on the motion, it
transpired that they had agreed to a stay pending appeal. The
parties have also agreed to an expedited schedule for written
submissions. All the submissions will be completed by 25th March,
and the parties asked the Court for an early hearing date. The
Court extended the stay on the parties consent, but Hardiman J.
told them come back on a Thursday, when, each week during term,
the Chief Justice deals with scheduling matters. It seems likely that
the hearing will take place some time in the first half of April,
before the term ends on the 15th of that month.
The Legal Diary for the coming week shows that only one appeal is
set for hearing on the merits. Initially, there were three more
appeals set for hearing, one each on Monday, Tuesday, and
Wednesday. One of these, Director of Corporate Enforcement v.
Bailey (High Court judgment here) has been rescheduled for late
March. The other twoMI v. HSE and Stanley v. Kieran (High
Court judgment here) have dropped off the Courts public calendar
entirely.
The sole hearing is in a personal injuries case, originally heard in
Limerick, called Fisher v. Padotzke. There is no publicly-available
High Court judgment for the case, which will be heard on Friday by
Hardiman, Finnegan & ODonnell JJ.
The same three judges will also hear a list of motions on Friday,
including in the McInerney Homes examinership case. The High
Court decided to withdraw the McInerney groups protection
against its creditors after rejecting a rescue plan, but the Supreme
Court has extended that protection at least until Friday. McInerney
now seeks to appeal the rejection of the rescue plan, and hence
needs the Supreme Court to grant continued protection for the
companies pending the hearing of the appeal. Thats what Fridays
motion is about.
The election hasnt thrown up any Bush v. Gore-style disputes, so
the judges of the Supreme Court will probably be using the quiet
week to work on judgments, perhaps those in Dellway v. NAMA.
But NAMA still hasnt made a formal decision whether or not to
acquire McKillens loans. Is NAMA waiting for guidance from its
new political masters?
The parties in Dellway v. NAMA were before the Supreme Court
today to help figure out the aftermath of last weeks ruling that

NAMA hasnt made a valid decision. I couldnt make it to Dublin,


so Im trying to piece together what happened from press reports
by the Irish Times and RT, with help from the NAMA Wine Lake
Blog. The bottom line: NAMA and the Supreme Court each have
some work to do over the coming weeks.
First, the NAMA Board is planning to convene to decide whether to
acquire McKillens loans. Thats no surprise. It also makes sense
that, in the six days since the Supreme Courts ruling, NAMA
hasnt already convened a Board meeting and issued a one-line
decision. NAMA will now take a little timeperhaps as much as
two weeksto make a reasoned decision, presumably a decision to
push ahead and acquire McKillens loans. If thats what happens,
McKillens lawyers are promising a new High Court action to
challenge the new decision. As a matter of litigation strategy, a
reasoned decision may serve NAMA well in that future action.
What is perhaps a little surprising is that, against NAMAs wishes,
the Supreme Court is also pushing ahead: it plans to rule on some
of the remaining issues in the case, without waiting to see what
NAMA does. (See here for a typology of the issues.) NAMA wanted
the Court to hold its fire on the remaining issuesthe Fair
Procedures Question, the Relevant Considerations Question, and
the Constitutionality Questionand wanted the Court to rule on
them after NAMA had made its fresh decision. But after conferring
briefly with his colleagues, Murray CJ told the parties that the
Court would rule on the Fair Procedures Question and the
Constitutionality Question without hearing further submissions.
On a strict approach, one might think that these questions are not
ripe for decision by the Court: unless and until NAMA actually
makes a valid decision to acquire McKillens loans, McKillen lacks
a grievance against NAMA. But NAMA is probably about to make
that decision, and anyway the Irish courts take a more relaxed
approach to questions of ripeness and mootness than, for example,
the US Supreme Court does. The Irish Supreme Court probably
feels that these questions have been sufficiently aired in the
McKillen litigation and that the participants would benefit from
swift answers.
It seems, however, that the Court has dropped the Relevant
Considerations Question. (According to RT, the court ruled that
one of the three remaining issues in Mr McKillens appeal was no
longer relevant. I think this refers to the Relevant Considerations
Question, but concededly theres more than one way to slice and
dice the issues.) That would be logical: in the absence of a valid
decision, the Court cant sensibly rule on whether or not the NAMA

Board failed to take into account all the considerations relevant to


its decision. By contrast, the Fair Procedures Question and the
Constitutionality Question can be answered in the abstract,
without reference to any particular decision by the Board.
As usual, the Court gave no indication as to when it will rule, but
Id guess it will take longer than two weeks. So its likely that
NAMA will make its fresh decision, and McKillen may even file a
new action, before we get judgments on the Fair Procedures and
Constitutionality Questions.
Thats my attempt to figure out whats happening in this
fascinating case. If any readerparticularly anyone who was at the
Court todayhas a better understanding of todays proceedings,
feel free to share it below or contact me directly.

NAMA under Fine Gael

A terrible noise exactly like thunder was heard in the outer room of
his apartments : it was the crowd of courtiers deserting the
antechamber of the dead sovereign to come and greet the new
power of Louis XVI
This was the account given by Marie Antoinettes chambermaid of
the immediate aftermath of the death of Louis XV all the courtiers
and hangers-on were making a mad dash from one end of the
palace where the king had just expired to the other end to
ingratiate themselves with the successor. And whilst I wouldnt want
to pre-judge the outcome of the voting count today, I would be
shocked if anyone other than Enda Kenny was to be our next
Taoiseach and Michael Noonan the next Minister for Finance. And I
would say the ingratiating started many months back.
Of interest here is the fact that the FG director of elections for
Limerick (Michael Noonans constituency) is none other than
insolvency expert Brian McEnery of Horwath Bastow Charleton .
Brian also happens to be one of NAMAs nine board members and I
would imagine that Michael Noonan is very well briefed indeed on
the challenges facing the agency. And it will be the Department of
Finance that has most political say in how NAMA operates in future,
though other ministries like the Department of the Environment
Housing and Local Government and Justice and Law Reform will also
have a role to play.
So what changes can we expect at NAMA:
(1) Personnel. NAMA is probably most associated with its chairman
Frank Daly and CEO Brendan McDonagh. Sections 22 and 40 of the
NAMA Act provides the Minister for Finance with wide discretion as
to the bases for removing the incumbent NAMA CEO and other
board members including the chairman. Will FG want a change of
personnel. Have some already ingratiated themselves to the new
administration and convinced the putative Minister for Finance that
a different set of hands would do a better job? There are certainly

rumours in this area.


(2) Stopping NAMA 2: We do not believe that transferring the
land and development loans of Irish banks of less than 20 million
to NAMA is in the best interests of the Irish economy FG has said
that it will stop the transfer of the sub-20m exposures from AIB
and Bank of Ireland to the agency. What that immediately means is
that the stress tests presently ongoing will need examine the values
of some 12bn of sub-20m loans.
(3) Outsourcing: We will force NAMA to outsource management
of at least 70% of its assets to 3-4 competing private asset
management companies FG is keen to get third party asset
management companies to take on NAMAs loans. Indeed a longheld concern on here is that NAMA with 100 staff is ill-equipped to
directly handle 175 developers (which might represent 5,000
development companies and 20,000 projects) and their 50bn of
loans at par value. On top of this NAMA must manage the banks
and Capita with their dealings for smaller value loans. Capita has a
long and coloured history of ingratiating itself with parties in power.
(4) NAMA strategy: remember it boils down to the six actions
(sell, lease, manage, develop, demolish, mothball). It seems there
is a clamour for NAMA to generate more sales. These are likely to
be in the UK and elsewhere abroad though NAMA needs to be
careful about opportunists who expect a NAMA knock-down. But I
expect there will be more sales here and given the condition of the
market, I expect sales at levels not seen before, bargains some
might say but that would be to ignore the distressed condition of
the existing market which is being artificially distorted without true
price discovery.
(5) Transparency: The details of all non-performing loans
acquired by NAMA will be available for scrutiny on a Public Register
(6) Paddy McKillens loans: NAMA was supposed to have made a
decision whether or not to proceed to acquire Paddys loans last
Wednesday. And we are still waiting for the Supreme Court to issue
its determination on the three outstanding strands to Paddys appeal
(to do with the fairness and constitutionality of NAMA and its
procedures). Will Michael Noonan decide that Paddys loans will
destroy value at the banks if transferred? Will he persuade NAMA to
release its grip on Paddys and other objectors loans?
(7) NAMA report and accounts for quarter three, 2010 which
were delivered to outgoing Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan on
31st December, 2010. Will Michael Noonan now ensure they are
promptly published?
(8) Dismantling upward-only rent reviews in commercial
leases. This manifesto commitment is really rattling the property
industry that sees 20% declines in commercial property values and
a repulsion of investors fearful of those declines. At the extreme on
the other hand, certain retailers and other commercial tenants are

literally praying it happens quickly because with existing rent levels


their businesses will die. Whatever FG does, it needs to do it
decisively and clearly. Otherwise this uncertainty of this Sword of
Damocles will hurt the property industry and do nothing for
commercial tenants.
Of course the bigger challenge facing the new Minister for Finance
will be dealing with the national debt burden including a
renegotiation of the IMF/EU bailout deal, the restructure of the
banking sector and dealing with the results of the stress tests
ongoing at the banks. But I would expect the Ministers fingerprints
to become transparent on the operation of NAMA within days.

Ireland is believed to have been one of only two EU countries (the


other being the UK) where upward-only rent reviews were common
features of business leases (rental contracts) until February, 2010
when Section 132 of the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act
2009 banned upward-only rent reviews in new contracts. Many
people may not have seen commercial lease agreements before but
would expect to see a term in the lease setting out the rent to be

paid for the relevant premises. Because business leases tend to be


longer than residential leases and because the tenant may wish to
occupy the premises for several years, provision is made in business
leases for the determination of future rent. That future rent may be
reference to growth in inflation, growth in turnover or to be
determined by an independent valuer these and others make for
many ways in which a future rent can be determined. Up to 28th
February, 2010 the likelihood was that the business lease would
provide for rent reviews but that the rent review would only be
upward (or have a nil increase, that is, stay the same). From 1 st
March, 2010 to reflect the collapse in our economy, upward only
rent review clauses were banned. But only for new leases. Not
retrospectively for old leases.

For existing leases, the existing terms continue to operate. So on


Grafton Street you may well have a lease on one premises paying
800 psf per annum and next door paying less than 100.
Businesses with old leases (ie those entered into before 1st March,
2010) are feeling the pain and feel particularly aggrieved at
competitors whose rent is fraction of theirs simply through an
accident of timing. After construction, the retail sector is said to
have suffered most with employment dropping from over 300,000
at peak to 136,000 in the latest CSO Quarterly National Household
Survey, retail is now the second biggest sector in the State after
Industry and therefore a key employment sector, particularly for
females. And with a general election on 25th February, political
parties have been setting out their stalls. And with jobs towards the
fore of the campaigns, both Labour an FG (policy document here
and manifesto here) the likely elements of the next government
regardless of the current cattiness have signalled that they will
retrospectively alter old leases. Terrific news for business tenants,
including the beleaguered retail sector. Dreadful news for landlords
and other property investors, eg NAMA.
Interestingly the property professionals industry association, the
Society of Chartered Surveyors (SCS, currently merging with the

Irish Auctioneers and Valuers Institute) has issued a position paper.


You might have expected this body which represents parties on both
sides of the transaction to have been neutral on abolishing
retrospectively upward-only rent reviews but no, it firmly comes
down on the landlord side and sets out in some detail the expected
collapse in commercial property values that would be expected in
the aftermath of any such move. For instance, it believes that least
20% will immediately be knocked off commercial property values
(capital values here are already down on average 60% from peak so
another 20% would bring the total fall from peak to 68%, a level of
fall that is already evident by the way in some cases). It also
believes that property investors would seek compensation from the
government with the taxpayer footing the bill and indeed a
retrospective change to leases would harm Irelands image abroad
as a stable home to foreign direct investment (FDI) which might see
a governments willingness to alter contract terms as an ominous
sign (what next, the corporation tax rate of 12.5%).
NAMA of course controls the biggest commercial property portfolio
in the country, worth 10bn according to the SCS. And a 20%
further decline in values would see NAMA in line for a 2bn loss. The
impact on our beleaguered banking sector could be even worse.
Given the residual non-NAMA loans in the NAMA Participating
Institutions (PIs, AIB, Anglo, Bank of Ireland, EBS, INBS) includes
70bn of commercial property lending (remember NAMA is primarily
about land and development with commercial property sucked in
under the heading of associated lending pure commercial property
exposures are left untouched by NAMA). So a further decline
engineered by a new government might see losses at the banks
balloon even further.

UPDATE: 16th February, 2011. The battle lines in the debate on


retrospectively altering commercial rents (mirroring the exchanges
of comments on here between Brian Flanagan and commenter
NAMAJew) continue to be drawn today. In the Irish Times, Bill
Nowlan argues the case on behalf of what might be seen as the
property industry whilst in the other corner is Retail Excellence
Ireland representing the retail sector which openly calls on
members to vote FG/Labour to protect jobs (not sure Id agree with
its assessment of numbers employed in the sector which seems to
be contradicted by the CSO Quarterly National Household Survey
cited and linked above).
UPDATE: 18th February, 2011. For completeness here is the IBEC
(employers association) retail sector statement on what was then
only Labours commitment to the retrospective changing of upwardonly review leases. There doesnt appear to be an IBEC property
sector statement on the matter Oddly enough, the Construction
Industry Federation (CIF) has yet to comment on the proposals, as
has the Irish Property Council.
UPDATE: 23rd February, 2011. I have rarely seen such a carefully
considered piece as the one penned by commercial property
commentator, Bill Nowlan in todays Irish Times in which he seems
to accept the inevitability of FG/Labours plans for retrospective rent
reviews. He cites IPD saying that on the portfolio in Ireland on
which they determine their index (with the Society of Chartered
Surveyors) the manifesto pledges would result in a 19.8% decline in
capital prices on the IPD-monitored portfolio. In one of the best
written pieces I think you could expect to see on this subject Bill
argues for a system which would protect tenants whilst deterring
chancers and try-ons. Whilst still firmly speaking for the
property industry (and I note the photograph used in the piece is of
a shopping centre owned by Irish Life who are a leading pension
provider in the State so any decline in commercial property prices
will affect grannies, geddit?), Bill suggests a system of reviews
which would borrow from insolvency processes and kick in where
rents constituted more than 10-15% of turnover. An interesting
contribution that deserves to be studied though I would think the
folks on other side of the argument, the tenants, might have
alternative proposals.
UPDATE(1): 2nd March, 2011. With negotiations ongoing between
Labour and FG to hammer out the terms under which a new
government can be formed (and with not a small chance that the
talks may fail, it should be said) it seems that the areas of
difference as reported in todays Irish Times citing sources from the
two parties, speaking on condition of anonymity do not include
retrospective rent reviews. And elsewhere in the Irish Times, David
Fitzsimons from Retail Excellence Ireland gives his reply to Bill
Nowlans article last week. He refers to the failure of Celtic

Bookmakers, Hughes Hughes, Sasha, Four Star Pizza, Toni Guy and
Chartbusters and claims extortionate rents as the fundamental
reason for their failure. It is an interesting article that tries to spell
out the benefits to the economy of lower rents in legacy leases
(those created before 1st March 2010 when upward only rent
reviews were lawful). He says that 30,000 jobs will be protected,
mostIrish pension funds invest less than 3% in property and that in
fact there has been little foreign investment in property in the last
eight years in any event. Elsewhere in the paper, there is an article
on the latest Cushman % Wakefield Office Space Around the
World report which ranks Ireland as 26th most expensive office
accommodation location with average rents including taxed and
service charges of 42psf down from 47psf the previous year and
that is attracting more foreign interest it is claimed. Cushman &
Wakefield also say that London City and West End rents rose by
25% last year.
UPDATE (2): 2nd March 2011. Property services powerhouse and
NAMA valuation panel member, CB Richard Ellis has just published
its first bi-monthly (I believe they mean every two months rather
than every two weeks) report looking at the commercial rental
sector in Ireland. The press release is here and the (very slightly
longer) report itself is here. It concludes that activity picked up in
January and February 2011 no doubt boosted by the fact that prime
rental levels are 50% off peak and there is little new space under
construction. Indeed there are only five new Grade A buildings in
Dublin 2 and 4 with over 75,000 sq ft.
UPDATE: 10th March, 2011. The Irish Times continues with what
seems like a series of essays on the subject of upward rent reviews
and today the Head of Investments and a director of agents, Lisney,
Anne Hargaden gives her views on the matter. She starts her essay
with an attack on ill-conceived arguments presented through the
media and then goes on to make what must be the most vacuous
arguments you are likely to hear on the subject (1) She attacks
governments interference in property rights disregarding the fact
that governments constantly interfere in rights of citizens and
companies all the time and she might consider that fact the next
time she sees people having a cigarette outside their offices (2) She
produces calculations which show that a 30% reduction in rent will
have a, er 30% reduction in capital values (3) She claims that Irish
citizens and banks and pensions are exposed to property and will be
disadvantaged by reductions in rent (4) She says that existing
commercial arrangements should see landlords willing to reduce
rents when the tenant is at the point of insolvency and (5) Using
wonky arithmetic (20% of 5% is 1%, not 2%) she claims that rent
is but a small part of a retailers cost base and insolvent businesses
which produce vacated premises will soon be filled again. It is to be
hoped that the property industry does not let this woman near

ministerial offices if it wishes to moderate the effect of the


manifesto pledge ill-conceived argument, highly-selective facts
and wonky arithmetic will not impress.
UPDATE: 30th March, 2011. Bill Nowlan tries to progress the debate
in todays Irish Times where he suggests that the proposal be
referred to the Law Reform Commission to consider, that being the
body which only in 2003 reported The Commission is clear that it
would not be appropriate to impose a mandatory statutory scheme
[on commercial rents] . This would run counter to one of the
guiding principles stated in the Consultation Paper on Business
Tenancies 36 and reiterated earlier in this Paper 37 namely,
removal of legislative provisions which militate against commercial
practice and operation of free market choice Elsewhere Bill refers
to the prancing of pressure groups (take a bow, Retail Excellence
Ireland!) and it seems clear where Bills sympathies lie in this
debate. But a key point he makes, for the expeditious conclusion of
this issue, seems welcomed by all parties regardless of their
sympathies.
UPDATE: 2nd April, 2011. The Irish Times reports on a year-old
letter from NAMA to the Department of Finance which complained in
May 2010 to then-Minister, Brian Lenihan that altering upward-only
lease terms to allow upward-downward reviews would devalue
NAMA assets and force NAMA to overpay for the remaining tranches
since it was valuing by reference to November 2009,
disproportionately benefit foreign commercial tenants and have
unhelpful consequences. The letter was penned by NAMA CEO,
Brendan McDonagh and its Head of Portfolio Management, John
Mulcahy. It is a year old and a Rice-Daviesesque reaction might be
appropriate : they would say that, wouldnt they
UPDATE: 18th April, 2011. David McWilliams has come out in favour
of lower rents, though he doesnt go so far as to support banning
Upward Only Rent Reviews. John McManus delivers a barely literate
and partly inaccurate article in support of changes to UORRs in the
Irish Times. He incorrectly claims that the recent Central Bank of
Ireland stress tests did not consider the abolition of UORRs when
the explicit change projected in the adverse scenario was 20%
different to the baseline scenario specifically to accommodate the
expected 20% drop which the SCSI has said would follow the
abolition of UORRs. The article focusses on improving competition
by setting rents at market levels.
UPDATE: 11th May, 2011. John Moran, managing director of JLL in
Ireland tells the Irish Times today that the threat of abolishing
UORRs is stopping investment and he cites as evidence the one
office investment transaction in Q1, 2011 in Ireland (the Layden
Group reportedly bought 42,000 sq ft Boole House in Clonskeagh,
Dublin 4 for 9.25m in April, 2011 which isnt even Q1 apparently
it was a sale and leaseback by telecoms giant, Ericsson). John goes

on to claim that there was 4bn waiting to enter the investment


market at the start of 2011 but that most of this has voted with its
feet and chosen not to deploy itself, citing that Government
interference with the market and contracts is an absolute
impediment to investment.
UPDATE: 8th June, 2011. A study has been conducted by CBRE in
Wexford town, sponsored by a number of parties who would appear
to have an interest in defeating the proposal to abolish UORRs.
According to the Irish Times The study found that of the 136 retail
properties in the town only 2 per cent of them were refused rent
abatement by their landlords. However, when the 45 per cent of the
shops which are owner-occupied as well as vacant units and
recently let stores are discounted from the survey, those refused
rent reductions accounted for 19 per cent of the total.
UPDATE: 17th July, 2011. Without citing sources, Aine Coffey in
Irelands Sunday Times (not available online without subscription)
reports that a Bill is making its progress through the Irish cabinet
and will be presented to the Oireachtas in September/October. The
Bill is to have a five-year sunset clause which the newspaper claims
is to bat off challenges to its constitutionality. A sunset clause
merely means the Act will be discontinued after five years but it is
not clear why a sunset clause would make the Act immune to legal
challenges by disgruntled landlords. Other features of the Bill are
reported to include
(1) It will only be in exceptional cases that tenants will get
changes to their leases
(2) The tenant must demonstrate that rents are threatening their
viable businesses
(3) The tenant must demonstrate the upward-only review clause
prevents the rent from reverting to a market rate. Its not totally
clear what this means, it might simply mean the tenant must show
that the lease is an UORR lease.
(4) Landlords will be entitled to defend attempts to change rents if
they can demonstrate rents being based on costs incurred on the
premises, though a defence will not be available based on existing
bank loans.
(5) The circuit court will be the court with authority to hear cases
but the tenant must wait a year after a review was first sought from
the landlord before becoming entitled to apply to the court.
(6) According to the Sunday Times the circuit court will also have
the power to rule on rent arrears. Again this is not clear perhaps
tenants will be entitled to reduce their rents paid pending an
outcome of the circuit court.
All in all, this report is worrying in the sense that all of the above
details have the potential to change property valuations. Minister
Shatter should be making a prompt statement on the matter and
his Department has been asked for comment.

Is there a Shell Corrib connection to the


sudden resignation of Irish Premier,
Bertie Ahern?
Apr 2nd, 2008 by admin.

By John Donovan
In December 2005 we published an article containing the
following paragraph:
It appears that extremely powerful forces are at work
and one wonders where the intrigue will lead in relation
to the Corrib pipeline. Will THE GREAT CORRIB GAS
CONTROVERSY turn into something even bigger a full
blown scandal?

http://www.shellnews.net/week49/shellnewscorrib14
dec2005.htm
We made the comment in the knowledge that the Irish
government has a reputation for corruption and over a
number of years gave concessions to the Corrib pipeline
consortium which many people believe were not in the
best interests of the Irish people.
Developments today increase the suspicion that
corruption robbed ordinary Irish people of a valuable
national resource, given away for a pittance to greedy
multinational giants. Royal Dutch Shell, the major
stakeholder in the Corrib project, has a track record of
being involved in bribery and corruption.
The following are extracts from an article published by
The Times earlier today:
Bertie Ahern, Irelands long-serving Taoiseach, abruptly
announced his resignation today amid continuing
controversy over his personal financial affairs.
He said his resignation was the result of a constant
barrage of allegations about his personal finances.
One of his mentors was the disgraced late prime
minister Charles Haughey, who took millions from
businessmen but called Mr Ahern the most cunning, the
most ruthless, the most devious of them all.
Mr Ahern had been expected to come under pressure to
day to explain a glaring contradiction in evidence he
gave to the Mahon Tribunal in February when he
claimed that he had never dealt in sterling.
His former secretary admitted to the Tribunal last week
that she lodged more than 15,000 into accounts held
by him and his two daughters in 1994.
But the man known as the Teflon Taoiseach was
adamant today that he had nothing to fear from a
continuing probe into his finances by a tribunal into
planning-related corruption.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe
/article3666383.ece
A Wikipedia article entitled the Corrib gas controversy
provides information about the suspicious
circumstances surrounding the role of certain
controversial Irish notables, including Bertie Ahern, in
relation to planning consent and associated matters.
The following are extracts:
In 1987, in a move described by Dick Spring as economic

treason [3], Fianna Fil Minister for Energy Ray Burke ended
all state involvement in oil and gas exploration [4]. In 1992,
then Minister for Finance (now Taoiseach) Bertie Ahern
extended licensing terms for oil and gas companies,
abolished royalties from Irish fields, and drastically
reduced the tax rate for exploration companies to the
lowest in the world. This prompted a director of Statoil
to remark: No country in the world gives as favourable
terms to oil and gas companies as Ireland. [5] The World
Bank puts Ireland at the top (in the very favourable
category) of its index of countries ranked by how congenial
their laws are to oil and gas companies, followed by Pakistan
and Argentina. Nigeria, where the influence of the oil
companies on government policy has been a source of much
controversy, only ranks as average.

In 2002, planning permission for a proposed refinery in


County Mayo was refused unequivocally by Senior
Planning Inspector Kevin Moore, of An Bord Pleanala
(the Irish planning authority). His report stated: From
a strategic planning perspective, this is the wrong site;
from the perspective of Government policy which seeks
to foster balanced regional development, this is the
wrong site; from the perspective of minimising
environmental impact, this is the wrong site; and
consequently, from the perspective of sustainable
development, this is the wrong site, and that it posed a

threat to a sensitive and scenic environment.


In an unprecedented subversion of the planning process, then
Minister for Marine and Natural Resources Frank Fahey told the
media that this refusal was just a hitch [6]. He was backed
by local Fine Gael TD (now leader of that party) Enda Kenny,
but opposed by another local TD (also from Fine Gael), Michael
Ring. An Bord Pleanala had asked Shell to examine the less
profitable option of refining the gas at sea. This was not done.
Planning permission was not required for the onshore
pipeline as, uniquely, the Irish government decided to
classify it as an offshore development.
In 2003 senior executives from Shell sought, and were
given, an interview with Ahern, who was now
Taoiseach, and other Irish government ministers. Within
a week, Ahern met with the board of An Bord Pleanala,
who are appointed by the government. The board
quickly decided to ignore its inspectors report, and
planning permission was granted soon after. Not long
before, a huge landslide swept away the whole surface area of
a mountain close to the intended pipeline route.
In 2005, Ray Burke was jailed for six months for tax evasion.
Burke is currently under scrutiny from the Mahon Tribunal for,
among other things, payments he received from Rennicks Ltd..
Rennicks Ltd. is associated with businessman Tony OReilly,
who secured many offshore licenses from Burke and Fianna
Fil in the 1980s. Bertie Aherns irregular financial affairs
during his tenure as Minister for Finance are also being
examined by the tribunal. Like his former party leader
Charlie Haughey, Frank Fahey has repeatedly failed to explain
adequately the source of the wealth that has allowed him to
build up an extensive international property and business
portfolio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrib_gas_controversy
The Corrib project has faced long term protest activity
from the Shell to Sea Campaign.
Shells reputation was badly damaged after it had five
Irish landowners jailed for several months after they
refused to let Shell have access to their property to lay a
pipeline. They became known as The Rossport Five.
Shell management lost face after it sought the release
of the protesters and in the process, had to issue an
apology for having them thrown in jail in the first place.
If evidence of corruption emerges, the project will turn
into another full blown reputation disaster for the Dutch

oil giant following on from the reserves fraud which left


Shells reputation in tatters.

Money from developer

Allegations had been made that he had taken IR50,000


(63,300) from a property developer, Owen OCallaghan, in
return for favours at this time. Ahern won a libel action against
a Cork businessman, Denis Starry OBrien, defending himself
against this allegation. However, broadcaster Eamon Dunphy
has testified in the Mahon Tribunal, that he was told by
developer Owen OCallaghan, that Ahern was taken care of to
support a shopping centre development in the 1990s.[87] This
follows the initial allegations, denied by Ahern and
OCallaghan, by retired developer Tom Gilmartin, that
OCallaghan told him that he had given Ahern a payment of
50,000 in 1989, and a payment of 30,000 in 1993, in
connection with a development of lands at Quarryvale, west
Dublin. Gilmartin further alleged being told that OCallaghan
had paid Ahern in excess of 20,000 in relation to tax
designation of a site in which OCallaghan had an interest in
Athlone, the designation having been Aherns last act as
Finance Minister before the Fianna Fil-led Government fell in
December 1994.
In March 2007, one of Aherns Manchester benefactors, Paddy
The Plasterer Reilly, was appointed as the Fianna Fil Director
of Elections for Aherns Dublin Central constituency.
In April 2007, it was alleged[88] in a statement by his former
official driver, that Ahern in 1994, while Minister for Finance,
took a briefcase full of cash to Manchester. This has been
denied by Ahern.
While the payment details initially seemed to damage Aherns
standing, the result of the 2007 general election indicated that
the damage was minor. In April 2007, an opinion poll found
that nearly half of voters believe Taoiseach Bertie Ahern still
has questions to answer over the payments controversy.[89]
RELATED: On Friday, 22nd October 2010 at 6:15 pm, a
film about the community at the centre of the Corrib Gas
controversy, entitled The Pipe, will screen at the
British Film Institute in Southbank only a few hundred
metres away from the headquarters of the Royal Dutch
Shell Group. It was here in this building on the 22nd
July 2002, that the Committee of Managing Directors of
Shell met to discuss, among other things, the recent
refusal of planning consent for the Corrib gas field

refinery by the Irish Planning Board. The following


decision taken here by the senior Shell management
team would set in train a collision course between a tiny
community and the Irish State, and one which would
have devastating consequences for the inhabitants of
the small coastal village of Rossport.
*Paddy Briggs worked for Shell for 37 years, the last 15
of which were in international brand and reputation
management appointments. Today, through his
BrandAware consultancy, he advises businesses on
brand and reputation management issues. Paddy is a
prolific writer and journalist, especially on his specialist
business subjects and on sport. He is also one of two
pensioner-elected trustees of the 13 billion Shell
Contributory Pension Fund

Bertie Ahern (22 October 2010)


Admission of undeclared payments
Ahern was criticised by the Moriarty Tribunal for signing
blank cheques for the then Taoiseach Charles Haughey,
without asking what those cheques were for. Ahern told the
tribunal that a policy of signing blank cheques was used on the
Fianna Fil party leaders account for reasons of
administrative convenience.[70] In September 2006 The Irish
Times printed claims allegedly leaked[71] from The Mahon
Tribunal that Ahern had received money from a millionaire
businessman while Minister for Finance in 1993.
The editor of The Irish Times defended the publication as being
in the public interest at a hearing of the tribunal, saying that it
was not a party to the Supreme Court case which restrained
the Sunday Business Post from publishing leaked documents.
This order was directed against the Sunday Business Post but
its interim order purported to restrain all media outlets from
publishing confidential material from the inquiry.
Ahern has admitted that he did receive money but said on
being interviewed that:
What I got personally in my life, to be frank with you is none
of your business. If I got something from somebody as a
present or something like that I can use it.
What Ahern said in 1996, while in opposition:
The public are entitled to have an absolute guarantee of the
financial probity and integrity of their elected representatives,
their officials and above all of Ministers. They need to know

that they are under financial obligations to nobody. (Dil


ireann transcript, December 1996)
This contradiction has been criticised in editorials in both the
Irish Independent[72] and The Irish Times[73]
Six days after the payments were publicised, Ahern admitted
in a[74] television interview[75] that he had received two
payments totalling IR39,000 (50,000) in 1993 and 1994.
Ahern regarded the money as a loan, but he conceded that no
repayments had at that time (September 2006) been made
and no interest has been paid. He said that he had attempted
to repay it, but that his friends would not accept repayment.
He claimed that he had broken no codes ethical, tax, legal or
otherwise.
On 28 November 2007, former NCB managing director Padraic
OConnor at the Mahon Tribunal, directly contradicted Mr
Aherns claims that long-standing friends gave him a loan just
after Christmas 1993.[76]
In the same interview, he also admitted to receiving a
payment of 8,000 from a group of 25 businessmen in
Manchester on one occasion. He claimed that this money was
again unsolicited, that it was a gift and therefore not subject to
tax as it had been received when abroad, and that it was paid
to him after he gave an after-dinner speech at an ad hoc
function. He claimed that the money was given to him as a
private citizen, not to him in his then role as Minister for
Finance, and that no other payments were received by him
after speaking at other similar functions. The Irish Times
reported on 30 September 2006 that part of this payment was
actually a cheque drawn on NCB Stockbrokers, a large Irish
company. A number of his benefactors have received
appointments as directors of State boards.[77] Insisting that no
favours had been offered or received, Ahern said:
I might have appointed somebody but I appointed them
because they were friends, n