Appointment of receivers invalid, court told

THE BATTLE over the future of Superquinn has intensified at the High Court with claims by two of its directors that the appointment of joint receivers to the troubled retail chain earlier this week was invalid. The receivers, meanwhile, have disputed the validity of a company resolution to present a petition for examinership.

John Douglas, general secretary of the Mandate trade union which, represents most of Superquinn’s 2,700 employees, also told the court yesterday that the workers, some of whom were in the packed court, were concerned for their jobs, and that Mandate was considering whether to seek to be joined to the court proceedings.

Superquinn directors David Courtney and Kieran Ryan, through their counsel Bernard Dunleavy, signalled their intention to seek injunctions restraining Kieran Wallace and Eamonn Richardson of KPMG from acting as receivers.

Brian Kennedy, for the receivers, said they wanted the court to decide if a valid resolution had been passed by the Superquinn company board last Monday to present the petition seeking the appointment of an examiner to the trading side of the company.

Counsel said there was an affidavit from a director of Superquinn, Simon Cantrell, which disputed claims by the other directors the company had passed a resolution at a meeting last Monday to petition for examinership.

Mr Dunleavy said there were four people at that meeting (held in the offices of Spain, Courtney, Doyle in Dublin) and the other three would swear affidavits, to be provided later yesterday, contradicting Mr Cantrell’s claims.

Ms Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan has adjourned to Monday several matters arising from the initiation of the examinership proceedings on Thursday, including whether the separate injunction proceedings aimed at restraining the receivers acting will be heard in conjunction with any examinership petition.

An independent accountants’ report, required before the court may appoint an examiner, is being finalised and will be provided to the sides by Monday, the court heard. The petitioners say financial information up to June last indicated the company had a realistic prospect of survival.

If the court concludes the petition can be heard, that hearing will proceed on Thursday, when it will be opposed by the banks and Musgrave Group.

Mr Dunleavy said he wanted clarification whether the receivers had directed officers and employees of Superquinn not to engage with the independent accountant. Mr Kennedy said he understood it had been sought to have any requests from the accountant “routed” through the receivers. The judge said it would be “on the receivers’ heads” if this delayed the court proceedings. Mr Kennedy said he wanted to make clear there was no withholding of information and the matter would be dealt with. The receivers’ ability to run the business was being greatly affected by the proceedings, he added.