Film company may seek injunction for planned sequel to Vikings series, court told

W2 alleges Vikings’ producers diverted some €40m out of film production company, Octagon Films Ltd

The High Court has heard that a German film company may seek an injunction over plans to make a sequel to the popular Vikings TV series.

Lawyers representing Berlin-based W2 Filmproduktion Vertriebs GmbH told Ms Justice Theresa Pilkington on Thursday that W2 may, as part of its ongoing action against producers Morgan O'Sullivan and James Flynn, seek an injunction over proposals to make a Vikings Valhalla series.

W2 has alleged the producers have diverted some €40 million out of a film production company, Octagon Films Ltd, of which they are all shareholders. Both men deny claims they diverted the funds to either themselves personally or corporate entities controlled by them. The case, which commenced in 2016, returned before Ms Justice Teresa Pilkington this week.

The judge has been asked by the defendants for an extension of time to they can fully comply with orders made by the court last June over the discovery of several categories of documents involving dozens of film and tv productions. The directors, represented by Bernard Dunleavy SC and Eamon Marray BL, say the amount of discovery, which the court directed was to be completed by mid-October last, is voluminous, involves over 500,000 documents and would cost €900,000 to prepare. Counsel said it was not a case of his clients “dragging their feet” or seeking to go behind the orders but they needed an extension to allow discovery to be completed to December 2020.

READ MORE

Delay

W2, represented by Paul Gardiner SC and Edward Farrelly SC, opposed the application, arguing the defendants are trying to delay proceedings which commenced some years ago. W2 sought the discovery of documents, emails and correspondence from a firm of solicitors concerning productions including TV series the Borgia, Vikings, and Penny Dreadful, saying those were “enormously important” to the claim.

During Thursday’s proceedings, Mr Gardiner told the court W2 had learned through media reports about the Vikings spin-off. W2 claims the fees generated from the original Vikings series are a central issue in the action. Counsel said W2’s case is the producers were not entitled to a profit, without Octoagon’s permission, from productions including the Vikings TV series.

W2, the court heard, fears the funds generated by Vikings Valhalla, which the German firm alleges should go to Octagon, will be diverted to the defendants. Counsel said they considered this was a breach of undertakings previously given to the High Court by the defendants and may result in W2 seeking injunction relief. In its action, W2 is suing the producers on behalf of Octagon by way of a derivative action, a claim by a shareholder on behalf of a corporation against another party – in this case Mr Flynn and Mr O’Sullivan, who are directors of Octagon.

Damages

W2, which invests in international film productions, says it acquired 49 per cent of Octagon’s shares in 2002. It is claiming damages for alleged breach of duty, alleged fraud, and alleged conspiracy against the producers. It also claims the defendants are obliged to account to the plaintiff in respect of all profits made through the producers and Octagon’s alleged involvement in dozens of tv and movie productions. The producers deny diverting any fees, income or opportunities that were due to Octagon to themselves or to any corporate entities controlled by them.

Mr O’Sullivan of Ardmore Park, Bray, Co Wicklow and Mr Flynn of Ballyedmonduff Road, Stepaside, Dublin, who between them own 51 per cent ofOctagon’s shares deny they traded as Octagon or used the company’s name and reputation. They claim Octagon was set up as a company devoted to film development and production activity and is a separate entity to their work for hire film production services they are associated with. Octagon, they claim, benefited from the defendant’s association with projects which were not part of Octagon’s business. The defendants also claim they separately owed pre-existing duties to other corporate entities involved in television and movie production which W2 knew of and ought to be aware of.