Missing solicitor contacts wife by phone

Missing solicitor Michael Lynn has been in phone contact with his wife Bríd Murphy in recent days, but she does not know his whereabouts, a High Court judge was told yesterday.

While Ms Murphy has initiated proceedings against her husband and ACC Bank for a 50 per cent share of the proceeds of sale of a house in Howth, there were "no marital difficulties" between the couple, Gary McCarthy, for Ms Murphy, also said.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly admitted proceedings by Ms Murphy against Mr Lynn and ACC Bank to the list of the Commercial Court. In her action, Ms Murphy is seeking 50 per cent ownership of the proceeds of sale of Glenlion House, Howth, Co Dublin, which the couple had intended as their family home, but which is now the subject of competing claims by Ms Murphy and several banks and other financial institutions.

Mr Justice Kelly observed that there would have to be a single hearing in which the various claims regarding Glenlion would have to be thrashed out to determine which had priority. He did not believe there would be "anything simple" about establishing priority claims in this case.

The judge noted that ACC had a registered charge for some €3.85 million, while there were other claims of €6.8 million from AIB, €5.1 million from First Active, €6.4 million from Ulster Bank, €5.8 million, plus a separate €500,000, from Bank of Scotland Ireland, and additional claims from other financial institutions. Ms Murphy was asserting her claim was superior.

He granted an application by John McBratney SC, for ACC, to appoint Rory O'Farrell as receiver over Glenlion. He said Mr O'Farrell had power to take possession of the property, insure and secure it and sell it. However, he could not distribute the proceeds of sale, pending directions from the court. The judge noted Mr O'Farrell had already gone in as the bank's receiver but some queries had been raised and the bank now wanted a court-appointed receiver.

As Mr Lynn was last seen in London, the judge directed that notice of the appointment be advertised in the Times newspaper and said Mr Lynn, once he purged his contempt (of the court order requiring him to attend last week for cross-examination by the Law Society) had liberty to apply to vary the order.

Counsel for other banks did not oppose the receiver's appointment but said their stance was without prejudice to their own claims relating to Glenlion. Ronan Murphy, for Irish Nationwide Building Society, said he believed the society had a claim over Glenlion that took precedence over that of ACC.

Mr McCarthy, for Ms Murphy, said his client had her own case regarding Glenlion. He said Ms Murphy did not know where her husband was and he had not returned to Ireland.

She had been in phone contact with him since Wednesday last (when he failed to adhere to the court order requiring him to attend for cross-examination by the Law Society) and he had said a London-based law firm, Merriman White, would be coming on record for him in relation to the proceedings brought against him by Ms Murphy concerning Glenlion, counsel added. Ms Murphy believed similar instructions would be given in the ACC proceedings.

Mr Justice Kelly said a week had passed since he had been told Merriman White was to come on record but they had not yet done so. In response to the judge, Mr McCarthy said Ms Murphy did not know where Mr Lynn was phoning from.

In the separate proceedings by Ms Murphy against Mr Lynn and ACC, the judge said he would admit those to the list and would join Irish Nationwide to the case as it was claiming a superior interest.

He said the proceedings by Ms Murphy against her husband had a family law aspect, as they sought a declaration of a 50 per cent interest in the property. However, he would admit the entire case to the commercial list as it made no sense to separate it. He added that Mr Lynn could be served with the proceedings through his wife, as she seemed to be in contact with him.

Mr McCarthy had earlier said this was not a family law matter and there were no marital difficulties between his client and Mr Lynn. He said some €7 million was being sought from his client relating to loans for Glenlion and she was claiming to be joint legal owner of the property. She wished to be able to deal with the claims against her in an orderly fashion and was denying that she had executed a document on foot of which ACC was making claims for Glenlion.

Also yesterday, in separate proceedings by First Active against Mr Lynn, the judge said it seemed the bank was entitled to orders for possession of three properties. Eoin McCullough SC, for the bank, said there was no significant dispute that it was entitled to those orders as it had registered mortgages. The properties are 10 Glór na Mara View, Dock Street, Galway; 50 Bessborough Avenue, North Strand, Dublin 3; and 59 Carlton Village, Youghal, Co Cork.

If AIB, which claims to have equitable mortgages over the same properties, decided to dispute the orders for possession, it should notify such a claim by January 21st, the judge directed. He noted there were disputes over whether First Active was entitled to orders for possession of four other properties.