Quinn Insurance in Administration

[Rossfan]

For a crowd that are "bankrupt" the Quinns seem to have no problem with hiring Barristers and traipsing through the Courts morning, noon and night.
They sicken my hole 

[supersarsfields]

No way? Wouldn't have guessed that.
Maybe use your head a little. I don't think the Quinns have an option on a lot of the court apperances.

[tommysmith]

Essentially that means the family of former Fermanagh businessman Sean Quinn can no longer sue Anglo/IBRC over the legality of €2.3 billion in debts, but the bank can still sue them in order to recover what it says the family owe.

Don't see how that would appear fair to any reasonable person.

I have to say when all this started i though the Quinns were at fault, lately i am not so sure.

[johnneycool]

For a crowd that are "bankrupt" the Quinns seem to have no problem with hiring Barristers and traipsing through the Courts morning, noon and night.
They sicken my hole 

The depths the Irish government are going to to prevent the Quinns having their day in court has a nasty smell to it alright.

Will the truth ever come out?

[FermGael]

For a crowd that are "bankrupt" the Quinns seem to have no problem with hiring Barristers and traipsing through the Courts morning, noon and night.
They sicken my hole 

The depths the Irish government are going to to prevent the Quinns having their day in court has a nasty smell to it alright.

Will the truth ever come out?

I think that may very well be the case.

It would not surprise me if a deal is now done with Nama.
The 'debt' is now on their book.  They have done deals with most of the major developers.
The will not have the baggage that IRBS had with the Quinn's and it may be a chance for both parties to try and come to some sort of compromise.

The Government does not want this going to court.

[muppet]

NAMA has been far more successful at extracting what it is owed than the IBRC/Anglo. That is one of the reasons why IBRC was shut down and everything moved to NAMA.

[supersarsfields]

I think the days of a compromise have been and gone. I don't see NAMA making a U-turn on what Anglo had been doing. I would love to have seen the Quinns continue with this case but I think the Irish state have made it pretty clear that they are not prepared to allow that to happen at any costs.

[muppet]

I think the days of a compromise have been and gone. I don't see NAMA making a U-turn on what Anglo had been doing. I would love to have seen the Quinns continue with this case but I think the Irish state have made it pretty clear that they are not prepared to allow that to happen at any costs.

At this stage I am expecting a Quinn to announce that they are doing this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0268437/

[supersarsfields]

They'd have more chance of getting him than the Irish state. At least god might play fair. 

[Shamrock Shore]

God probably keeps receipts.

[orangeman]

Essentially that means the family of former Fermanagh businessman Sean Quinn can no longer sue Anglo/IBRC over the legality of €2.3 billion in debts, but the bank can still sue them in order to recover what it says the family owe.

Don't see how that would appear fair to any reasonable person.

I have to say when all this started i though the Quinns were at fault, lately i am not so sure.

I have to say when all this started that I thought that the government were not deliberately trying to stroke the Quinns. Now I am sure they've stroked them !

[FermGael]

God probably keeps receipts.

They are just using the Bertie defence. If it's good enough for the Taoiseach.

[Rossfan]

God probably keeps receipts.

They are just using the Bertie defence. If it's good enough for the Taoiseach.

No one believed him either 

[FermGael]

God probably keeps receipts.

They are just using the Bertie defence. If it's good enough for the Taoiseach.

No one believed him either 

Maybe but he still got away with it

[supersarsfields]

Members of Seán Quinn's family have been given permission by the Commercial Court to bring a challenge to a section of the recently passed IBRC legislation, which places a stay on legal proceedings against the liquidated bank.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly said the court was faced with "something of a conundrum" as the Quinns' case against IBRC was before the court for mention today.

The judge said the IBRC Act had been passed into law yet no one could get a copy of it. This was an unsatisfactory situation, he said.

A section of the Act provided for an immediate stay on all proceedings against IBRC and the Quinns were asking for leave to bring a case seeking to have that stay lifted.

The judge said his first concern was there was no jurisdiction in the Act to lift that stay but there appeared to be provision to permit new proceedings.

The issues would have to be argued before the Court he said, adding that this was the first of a number of cases against IBRC before the Commercial Court and the outcome would have implications for all litigation affected by the stay.

A hearing of the application will be held on 7 March.

The Quinns' case against IBRC claims they are not liable for €2.34bn in loans, which they claim were unlawfully given to prop up the bank's share price.

The case was due before the Commercial Court today to consider an application by the Quinns to join others to the case.

Counsel for the Quinns, Ross Alyward, said the family were seeking liberty to bring a motion asking the Court to lift the stay on proceedings against the bank provided for in the new legislation.

He said the jurisdiction of the court to lift the stay would be a matter for debate. Senior Counsel for the liquidator Paul Gallagher said there was no objection to the bringing of the application.

Mr Justice Kelly asked if anyone had been able to get a copy of the Act as passed and was told by Paul Gallagher it was "not available at the moment".

The judge said it was "very unsatisfactory that we all have to work within an Act and can't get a copy of it, and we are left conjecturing as to whether there were any amendments" before it was passed.

He granted liberty to bring the application and said the Court would have to construe the provisions of the act to see if there was jurisdiction to deal with the stay.

The case was the first major litigation against the bank in the Commercial Court list to arise since the legislation.

However there were many others which all appear to be captured by the stay, Mr Justice Kelly said, adding that it would have implications for all litigation affected by the stay.