Former One Fifty One boss entitled to €1.48m judgment
FORMER chief executive of investment firm One Fifty One, Philip Lynch, is entitled to summary judgment for €1.48m against the company, the Court of Appeal ruled.
Mr Lynch resigned from the firm in July 2011 and sought payment of €1.48m due to him under a patent income scheme.
While chief executive, he entered a deed of indemnity in relation to the patent income with Chandela Nominees Ltd whereby it (Chandela) subscribed for certain loan notes and shares and held them for Mr Lynch's benefit.
In 2012, the High Court granted judgment for €1.48m in favour of Mr Lynch against One Fifty One. A similar application against Chandela and another firm Chandela Investments Ltd were adjourned for full hearing by the High Court.
One Fifty One appealed the decision and on Friday (Feb 26), the Court of Appeal ruled the High Court was correct in ordering judgment in favour of Mr Lynch.
Mr Justice Gerard Hogan, on behalf of the three-judge court, said One Fifty One had in correspondence in July 2011 said payment would be made by August 2011, although it was not.
The company argued this correspondence was predicated on the assumption that there would be compliance with certain terms in relation to the loan note agreements concerning the patent scheme and that such compliance had not been put in place.
The "striking thing" about this correspondence, the judge said, was there was never any suggestion by the company that the "completion of these formalities" (compliance with the loan note agreements) was not within One Fifty One's effective control.
This all suggested that both the Chadela companies were "simply corporate vehicles which were within the complete control of the company (One Fifty One) and the repayment of these monies to Mr Lynch was a matter which could be readily accomplished by it without any further reference to him," he added.