Thursday 27 November 2014

Crosbie: I shouldn't be forced to live on €5k a month

Tim Healy

Published 12/07/2014 | 02:30

Michael McDowell SC, for Mr Crosbie, said his client was a businessman whose businesses could not function if he had an income of €1,250 a week
Michael McDowell SC, for Mr Crosbie, said his client was a businessman whose businesses could not function if he had an income of €1,250 a week

BUSINESSMAN Harry Crosbie says he should not have to live on €5,000 a month as one of the conditions for NAMA not enforcing a €77m judgment against his home and other assets.

NAMA sought conditions because it believes Mr Crosbie is seeking to "walk away from his debts and leave them in the lap of the taxpayer", Paul Sreenan SC told the Commercial Court.

Mr Crosbie has failed to give an undertaking not to deal with his assets and NAMA believed he had not fully disclosed all those, including valuable antiques, NAMA's counsel added.

As a public body seeking to recover debts for the taxpayer, he said NAMA believed it must be entitled to register its judgment against various assets, including Mr Crosbie's home at Hanover Quay, Dublin.

But Michael McDowell SC, for Mr Crosbie, said his client was a businessman whose businesses could not function if he had income of €1,250 a week.

An undertaking by NAMA that it would not move to bankrupt Mr Crosbie without giving him five days notice was "valueless", he said. But his client was happy to promise not to petition for his own bankruptcy either here or abroad, counsel said. Mr Crosbie wanted to avoid bankruptcy, and he contended NAMA was not entitled to petition for that.

Mr Crosbie was very concerned that NAMA apparently intended to move to register judgment mortgages on his family home. It was his case that an August 2012 "binding agreement" with NAMA prevented it enforcing against assets including his own family home, the family home and business of his son Simon and businesses of Mr Crosbie's wife Rita.

Purpose

NAMA has "skirted" round the issue of the purpose and meaning of the August 2012 agreement, counsel added.

Mr Crosbie had previously addressed NAMA's claims that he had not fully disclosed his assets in a statement of affairs, counsel added.

Mr Crosbie was also not seeking to prevent sale of the Grand Canal Theatre, but was contending he was entitled to damages over the premises been wrongly included in a "scoop" of his assets by NAMA.

Mr Justice David Keane yesterday reserved his decision on Mr Crosbie's application for a stay on enforcement of the €77m judgment.

The judge also reserved his decision on NAMA's application to strike out Mr Crosbie's proceedings against it, yet to be heard.

Irish Independent

Promoted articles

Read More

Promoted articles

Editor's Choice

Also in Irish News