MARY CAROLAN
Businessman Harry Crosbie objects to a maximum of €5,000 in monthly living expenses, amongst other conditions, being sought by Nama. These conditions are in return for not enforcing a €77 million judgment against his home and other assets pending further legal proceedings, the Commercial Court heard.
Nama sought such conditions because it believes Mr Crosbie seeks to “walk away from his debts and leave them in the lap of the taxpayer”, Paul Sreenan SC for the agency, said.
Mr Crosbie has failed to give an undertaking not to deal with his assets and Nama believed he had not fully disclosed all of these, including valuable antiques, counsel added.
As a public body seeking to recover debts for the taxpayer, Nama believed it must be entitled to register its judgment against various assets, including Mr Crosbie’s home at Hanover Quay, Dublin.
Michael McDowell SC, for Mr Crosbie, said his client is a businessman whose operations could not function if he had an income of €1,250 a week.
An undertaking by Nama it would not move to bankrupt Mr Crosbie without giving him five days’ notice was “valueless” but his client was happy to undertake to Nama, as it had sought, not to petition for bankruptcy, counsel said.
Mr Crosbie was concerned Nama apparently intended to move to register judgment mortgages on his family home when, he claims, an August 2012 "binding agreement" with Nama prevented it enforcing against assets including his family home, the home and business of his son Simon and businesses of his wife Rita. Nama has "skirted" the issue of the purpose and meaning of the August 2012 agreement, counsel added. Reserved decision
Mr Crosbie previously addressed Nama’s claims that he had not fully disclosed his assets, counsel added.
Mr Crosbie was also not seeking to prevent the sale of the Grand Canal Theatre but was contending he was entitled to damages over the premises being wrongly included in a “scoop” of his assets by Nama.
In an affidavit, Mr Crosbie said execution of the €77 million judgment would be a “grave injustice” and have “catastrophic and irreversible” consequences for himself and his family. If Nama succeeded in enforcing it, that would render his home unsaleable and prevent him borrowing any money on it.
Having heard final arguments from both sides, Mr Justice David Keane reserved his decision on Mr Crosbie’s application for a stay on enforcement of the €77 million judgment which the judge found last month Nama was entitled to enter against Mr Crosbie. The businessman wants the stay, pending the outcome of his legal proceedings alleging Nama is precluded from enforcement.
The judge also reserved his decision on Nama’s application to strike out Mr Crosbie’s proceedings against it, which have yet to be heard. Nama contends those proceedings were brought in breach of section 182 of the Nama Act, which prevents claims for any orders against it, other than damages, being brought without court permission.
Claiming damages In his action Mr Crosbie alleges he has a binding agreement with Nama under the August 2012 letters which precludes the agency enforcing his debts. He is also claiming damages.
Nama’s €77 million judgment arose from personal debts of Mr Crosbie and guarantees of liabilities of Shoal Trading Ltd and Ossory Park Management Ltd.
Judgment is not being sought for other sums due under a separate €353 million facility for development of the Point Village.
