Re Genport Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: McCracken J.
• Judgment Date: 21 November 1996
• Neutral Citation: [1996] IEHC 34
• Docket Number: RECORD NO. 1995/48 COS
• Court: High Court
• Date: 21 November 1996

RE GENPORT LTD

IN THE MATTER OF GENPORT LIMITED

AND

IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACTS 1963 -1990

[1996] IEHC 34

RECORD NO. 1995/48 COS

THE HIGH COURT

McCracken J.

2 This is a Petition by Caroline Devine ("the Petitioner") to wind-up Genport Limited ("the Company") on the ground that the company is unable to pay its debts or should be deemed unable to pay its debts by reason of a notice of demand made by the Petitioner on 17th January, 1995 pursuant to Section 214 of the Companies Act, 1963.

3 The background to this Petition is somewhat unusual. The Petitioner was a Defendant in proceedings in which Philip Smith and the Company were the Plaintiffs and Hugh Tunney, Crofter Properties Limited, Gerald B. Coulter and the Petitioner were Defendants. This action arose out of a purported settlement of a dispute between the Company and Crofter Properties Limited, in which serious allegations were made, inter alia, against the Petitioner. On 24th November, 1989 Mr. Justice Murphy dismissed the action and, inter alia, awarded the Petitioner two-thirds of her costs as against both Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs sought a stay of execution in relation to the Order for costs and Mr. Justice Murphy made an Order staying execution for a period of fourteen days from the perfection of his Order, but made no further Order in relation to a stay. The Plaintiffs appealed against the decision of Mr. Justice Murphy and further appealed by Motion to the Supreme Court for an Order staying execution in respect of the costs. This was met by various cross-appeals by the Defendants, including an appeal by the Petitioner for an Order for security for costs in relation to the appeal. On 2nd February, 1990 the Supreme Court refused both Orders, and accordingly there remains a valid Order for payment of the Plaintiffs' costs in that action when taxed and ascertained.

4 In due course the Petitioner's costs were taxed, and, following an application to the High Court for review of the taxation, ultimately a Certificate of Taxation was issued dated 30th November, 1994 certifying the sum of £52,363.88 to be due. On 17th January, 1995 the Petitioner served a demand for this sum, together with the sum of £21,037.36 for interest up to 2nd December, 1994, pursuant to Section 214 of the Companies Act,1963. This Petition was then issued by the Petitioner and has been adjourned on a number of occasions since.

5 The proceedings which gave rise to the Order for costs were part of a long running series of disputes between the Company and Mr. Philip Smith, who is effectively the owner of the Company, on the one hand and Crofter Properties Limited and Mr. Hugh Tunney on the other hand. The Petitioner was an employee and certainly at one time a Director of Crofter Properties Limited, but the proceedings in which she was awarded her costs appear to be the only proceedings in which she has actually been named as a party.

6 The original dispute arose out of the relationship of landlord and tenant. The Company was and is the tenant of substantial premises in Morehampton Road in Dublin known as Sachs Hotel, and Crofter Properties Limited are the landlords. Crofter Properties Limited sought to forfeit the lease for various alleged breaches of covenant, and the parties purported to come to an agreement in relation to this dispute. Unfortunately, the agreement collapsed, and it was alleged by the Company and Mr. Smith that alterations had been...