Car dealer jailed for contempt

A High Court judge has ruled the Revenue Commissioners are entitled to have a car dealer again jailed over contempt of court orders requiring him to fully disclose his assets and dealings as part of Revenue efforts to execute a €4.97 million judgment against him over unpaid taxes.

The Revenue had earlier strongly criticised John Kane’s engagement with them, accused him of engaging in unusual property transactions and undisclosed cross-border vehicle and other dealings in an effort to evade the judgment and added it suspected he may have a “fund” somewhere.

After hearing from the Revenue and Mr Kane, also known as Alex Kane, of Granard, Co Longford, Mr Justice Peter Kelly said today he would lift the stay on an order for the imprisonment of Mr Kane and ruled the Revenue was entitled to have him jailed for contempt.

As there is no longer a Garda presence in the Four Courts, the Revenue will have to seek a committal order to have Mr Kane jailed, the judge observed. He urged Mr Kane, in the short time available to him, to “finally come clean” with Revenue and provide full disclosure of his business activities and assets. “This is your last opportunity”, he said.

Unless Mr Kane did so, the outlook for him was “bleak”, the judge warned. He would go to jail until he had satisfied the court he had purged his contempt.

The judge added he took no pleasure whatsoever in sending Mr Kane to an already overcrowded Mountjoy Prison at public expense but court orders must be obeyed and Mr Kane had had “numerous opportunities” to deal with the Revenue queries.

Mr Kane had brought all this misery on himself and while he had co-operated with the Revenue to some extent and paid some monies, he was expected to give full information and not just “part of the truth”. He had “not acquitted himself well”.

Mr Justice Kelly also remarked it was curious, despite a freezing order on Mr Kane’s assets having been in existence since December last, Mr Kane had never applied to have that varied for living expenses. He also noted the Revenue had obtained documents from the Northern Ireland authorities indicating a “substantial off record trade” in tractors carried on by Mr Kane.

Mr Kane said he had answered the questions put to him by Revenue and there was “nothing more I can do” but he was prepared to meet with Revenue outside court. The matters outlined by the Revenue “blackened” him and while he did owe some monies, he did not have €4.9 million and had done all he could to provide the information sought. He received some rental income from properties and that was why he had not sought to vary the freezing order, he added.

Earlier, Anthony Collins SC, for the Revenue, had read out lengthy material to support the Revenue’s claims of non-cooperation, deception and evasion by Mr Kane. Counsel said Mr Kane engaged in a pattern where first of all he denied matters put to him about his assets and, only when confronted with information about those by Revenue which it obtained at great expense and effort, provided only partial information.

Mr Kane had for example denied any involvement at all with tractors until confronted with information obtained by the Revenue from the Northern Ireland authorities, counsel said.

The Revenue believed there were monies out there but Mr Kane was concealing them, counsel said. This could not be described as “co-operation” with Revenue as required by the court orders.

Today’s proceedings arose after the Revenue applied to lift a stay placed by Mr Justice Kelly on his order of April 25th last sanctioning a second period of imprisonment for Mr Kane. Mr Kane was previously jailed for a week last December for contempt.

The Revenue had in July 2009 obtained summary judgment orders for €4.97 million against John Kane and €5.27 million against his brother, Pauraig Kane, over unpaid taxes in connection with the operation of their SUV business in Granard. The Revenue also obtained orders freezing the brothers’ accounts below some €10 million and directing them to fully disclose their assets.