Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

High Court

Court action against Sean Quinn adjourned after businessman fails to turn up

Companies which were originally set up by Quinn wanted an injunction restraining him from trespassing on their lands.

HIGH COURT PROCEEDINGS aimed at preventing former billionaire Sean Quinn from trespassing on lands owned by the group of companies he set up were adjourned after the businessman failed to turn up in court.

In a letter emailed to the court Quinn said that he was unable to attend due to the short notice of the proceedings but did offer an undertaking not to visit property owned by Mannok Quarries.

However, he said that he requires access to a certain roadway that connects a quarry in Co Cavan owned by the plaintiffs to a cement factory.

On Wednesday lawyers for Mannok Cement Limited and Mannok Build Ltd told the Court that Quinn is trespassing on a quarry owned by the companies.

They wanted an injunction restraining Quinn from further trespassing, on the grounds that he has no entitlement to be on Swanlinbar Quarry in Co Cavan.

The companies claim that on several occasions since late 2019 Quinn has trespassed on their lands.

The most recent trespass, it is claimed occurred on May 8th last when he was seen driving on its lands, in his E class Mercedes Benz, including at Swanlinbar Quarry.

The firms, represented by Andrew Fitzpatrick SC and Michael Binchy Bl claim that the lands are active industrial sites, where heavy machinery is being operated, and Quinn’s alleged presence amounts to a significant health and safety risk.

The companies secured permission to serve short notice of the injunction proceedings on Quinn at his homeat Greaghrahan, Ballyconnell, Co Cavan.

When the case returned before the court today Mr Justice Alexander Owens was told by Fitzpatrick that Quinn was neither present nor represented in court.

The Judge said that he had received an email from Quinn stating that he was unable to attend “due to the short notice,” he was given regarding the action.

Fitzpatrick said his clients are “sceptical” about the contents of Quinn’s letter but were not seeking the injunction at this stage of the proceedings.

Mr Justice Owens agreed to adjourn the application to a date next week.

In the letter Quinn, who apologised for not attending, said he was prepared to give an undertaking if he could access a road built by him 20 years ago that links Swanlinbar quarry to a cement factory.

The road was built on lands owned by patties including local farmers, who he said had leased it back to him.

He said the road is used by Coillte, local turf cutters, farmers and by windfarm operators.

He said that he required access for business reasons, as he has an interest “in limestone land” on the Swanlinbar side of the mountain.

He also required access to the road because he is “in discussions with investors” and local landowners regarding the building of a new windfarm on the mountain.

He said he did not accept certain claims made by Mannok, including that his presence amounted to a health and safety risk.

He said he knew the property like “the back of my hand”. The sites he said were closed and there were not moving vehicles.

Quinn added that the case could be resolved without “further troubling the court” adding that he had abided with a previous undertaking given to a Belfast Court not to enter onto lands owned by the plaintiffs in Northern Ireland.

He was happy to provide a undertaking not to visit sites owned by Mannok as long as his access to the roadway was not inhibited.

The plaintiffs claim Quinn has no right or interest in the lands and has no defence to the claims against him.

The firms say they are not entirely certain what is the purpose of Quinn’s alleged trespasses.

They believe his actions amount to “a misguided form of aggression in the form of defiance” aimed towards the company’s management.

The firm’s directors fear that unless restrained by the court his trespassing will continue.

The two companies are subsidiaries of Mannok Holdings DAC, which was formerlyQuinn Industrial Holdings DAC/Quinn Group/Aventas Group and is part of the Mannok group which specialises in the sale and supply of building products and packaging solutions.

Author
Aodhan O Faolain