Possession dispute settled between Nama and Dublin hotelier

A dispute between the operator of a Dublin city centre hotel and a Nama-appointed receiver over possession of the premises has been resolved.

As part of the arrangement, Lynams Hotel, Upper O'Connell Street, will be handed over to the receiver on August 1st, when the 21 staff employed there will also be made redundant, Mr Justice Paul Gilligan was told on Thursday.

The hotel has been run by Theresa Andreucetti since 2008 under a lease with the landlords.

Earlier this month, she secured a temporary High Court injunction allowing her retain possession of the premises.

She went to court after agents for receiver Aiden Murphy, appointed by Nama last September over assets of the landlords, entered the hotel and told staff he was taking possession because Ms Andreucetti had failed to pay some €528,000 in arrears of rent.

When seeking the injunction, the hotelier denied rent arrears were owed and contended the receiver was not entitled to possession.

Counter-claim

She had counter-claimed for hundreds of thousands of euro allegedly due to her from having to carry out repairs to the building’s roof. The cost of those works, plus damages arising from bedrooms in the hotel being unusable due to water damage from the leaking roof, should be borne by the landlords, she claimed.

The matter returned before the High Court on Thursday when Mr Justice Gilligan was informed the parties had reached an agreement.

That involved Ms Andreucetti giving an undertaking she would, subject to a three-month stay, give vacant possession of the hotel to the receiver. As part of the deal, Ms Andreucetti will continue to operate the hotel for the next three months.

Her counsel Martin Canny BL said she will not take any further bookings for any time after the handover date of midnight on August 1st. The staff are also to be made redundant on that date.

Counsel said it had also been agreed she will pay rent to the receiver and also pay rates and arrears of rates due to Dublin City Council.

Eamon Marray BL, for the receiver, said his client wants to sell the property as soon as possible. A three-month stay on the possession order was the most his client could allow in order to facilitate a quick sale, counsel added.