Twitter Facebook Vimeo Youtube Google Plus Pinterest Tumblr
October 6, 2009

Zoe group not entitled to seek court protection

The Supreme Court ruled today that developer Liam Carroll’s heavily insolvent Zoe property group is not entitled to proceed any further with its bid for court protection from creditors. The Supreme Court ruled today that developer Liam Carroll’s heavily insolvent Zoe property group is not entitled to proceed any further with its bid for court protection from creditors. The court found the group’s second case for protection was an abuse of court process. The ruling means the group cannot go ahead with its appeal against a second High Court refusal to appoint an examiner to key Zoe companies. Mr Justice Frank Clarke found last month the group had failed to show it has a reasonable prospect of survival and he refused protection in those circumstances. Today, the three judge Supreme Court granted ACC Bank’s appeal against a decision by Mr Justice John Cooke to allow Zoe bring that second application for protection, the first having been refused by both the High and Supreme Courts. The Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray, said the group had relied on material evidence in its second petition which it had consciously and deliberately chosen not to put before the courts in the first petition despite that evidence being available to, or obtainable by it, on the first occasion. The court found the group’s second case for protection was an abuse of court process. The ruling means the group cannot go ahead with its appeal against a second High Court refusal to appoint an examiner to key Zoe companies. Mr Justice Frank Clarke found last month the group had failed to show it has a reasonable prospect of survival and he refused protection in those circumstances. Today, the three judge Supreme Court granted ACC Bank’s appeal against a decision by Mr Justice John Cooke to allow Zoe bring that second application for protection, the first having been refused by both the High and Supreme Courts. The Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray, said the group had relied on material evidence in its second petition which it had consciously and deliberately chosen not to put before the courts in the first petition despite that evidence being available to, or obtainable by it, on the first occasion.

The Irish Times

Related Posts

  • No Related Posts Found

Leave a Reply