Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court rejects application brought by shareholder of a company seeking to have the respondent removed as liquidator for the company, on the grounds that: (a) the applicant failed to show that there was good cause to remove the liquidator; (b) the Court was satisfied that the respondent will conduct the remainder of the matters in the liquidation in a prompt and orderly fashion, and those issues do not warrant the appointment of a replacement liquidator; (c) the Court was not willing to remove the respondent for the the sole purpose of permitting a replacement liquidator to investigate the respondent’s conduct when it would increase both the cost and length of the liquidation; (d) if the Court were to make such an order, it would need to be persuaded that there was a strong possibility that such an investigation would reveal conduct or disclose unknown documentation or information which would reveal matters warranting action to be taken on behalf of the company; (e) the Court had to have regard for the potential impact of the proposed removal on the respondent’s professional standing and reputation in circumstances where there had been no suggest of dishonesty on the part of the respondent; and (f) whilst the conduct of the liquidator may have at times fallen short of ideal, he was generally effective and honest.
Application to remove the respondent as liquidator of a company in voluntary liquidation pursuant to s.638(1)(b) of the Companies Act 2014 ("the Act") brought by a shareholder and seeking the appointment of another named individual - the applicant owns 50% of the shares in the company along with the notice party who also owns 50% of the shares - the company passed a special resolution that the company was to be wound up voluntarily as a members’ voluntary winding up following a serious deterioration in the relationship between the two shareholders - the respondent was appointed as liquidator of the company on 9th April, 2008 - the basis for the applicant's plea for removal of the respondent as liquidator of the company focused on the conduct by the respondent of the liquidation in relation to the preservation and sale of the assets of in the Polish element of the business and the attempts to resolve a compensation claim - the respondent replied by way of affidavit in which he defended his conduct - whether the applicant had shown that there was good cause to remove the liquidator - whether the concerns of the applicant as a shareholder of the company were “real and reasonable" - whether the liquidator was generally effective and honest - application dismissed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now