Quinn jnr to purge contempt, say lawyers

Seán Quinn jnr has given instructions that he wants to purge his contempt of court orders, which led to his serving a three-month jail term, his lawyers have told the High Court.

Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne, who jailed Mr Quinn on July 20th, yesterday told Ross Aylward that that “sounds very promising and hopefully that will turn out to be the case”.

Given the continuing exchange of correspondence between lawyers for Irish Bank Resolution Corporation and the Quinn side, Shane Murphy SC, for the bank, said the sides had agreed the contempt proceedings against Mr Quinn jnr, his father and his cousin Peter Darragh Quinn, could be adjourned to December 13th.

Those contempt proceedings arose in the context of companies protecting some €430 million of assets in the family’s property group.

Mr Murphy said new lawyers had come on record for the Quinn children and some of their spouses but not for Seán Quinn snr or Peter Darragh Quinn.

The judge directed Peter Darragh Quinn be called in court, but there was no appearance by him or on his behalf.

The judge had on July 20th imposed a three-month jail term on him for contempt but, when he did not attend court that day, she issued a warrant for his arrest. But he remains at his home in the North.

Seán Quinn snr was jailed last month for nine weeks and the judge was told by Karen Nolan he had instructed his lawyers on November 7th last that he no longer wished them to represent him.

Mr Murphy also said that correspondence from IBRC had been sent to the Quinn side related to its intention to “recalibrate” some 30 coercive orders made by the judge last July aimed at reversing asset-stripping measures. The bank has initiated that process in light of a Supreme Court decision that the High Court was not entitled to jail Seán Quinn jnr indefinitely on foot of those orders.

Also yesterday, Mr Justice Frank Clarke ruled that a “material change of circumstances” justified granting a separate application by IBRC to set aside the judge’s decision referring a legal issue raised by the Quinns to the European Court of Justice for determination.

That issue was whether the courts here or in Cyrpus should determine the dispute between IBRC and the Quinns about their global businesses.