• Posted in:

    Nada from Nama

    The revelation that the National Asset Management Agency (NAMA) has failed to disclose “relevant material” to the Commission of Investigation into its controversial sale of its 11.5 billion (£1.24 million) Project Eagle loan portfolio in the North in 2014 will not come as any surprise. Many NAMA watchers have been wondering how the Commission, headed by retired High Court judge, John Cooke, has been progressing given that it is now more than a year since it was established. It took the previous two years to convince the reluctant former Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan, and then Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, to concede to a formal inquiry into the portfolio sale to US fund Cerberus despite the dramatic and shocking allegations of corporate and political corruption that first emerged in July 2015. At that time, Independent TD, Mick Wallace, told the Dáil that a sum of £7m had been lodged in an Isle of Man bank account in connection with the sale and that it was intended for political and business interests associated with Project Eagle. NAMA executives were not exactly forthcoming about the background to the loan disposal and rejected out of hand the conclusions of the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), in September 2016 that the agency had incurred a loss of a potential €223m (£190m) from the sale. The C&AG, Seamus McCarthy, resisted intense pressure from Noonan, the Department of Finance and NAMA executives and board to withdraw his damning report which then formed the basis of an inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee in late 2016. Its report was even more damning of the agency and of Noonan’s role in permitting the sale to proceed despite knowledge of questionable fee payments relating to it. The finance committee at Stormont carried out its own investigation in 2015 to which many of the parties to the deal gave evidence – although the NAMA chairman, Frank Daly and chief executive, Brendan McDonagh declined an invitation to attend as did the senior staff and advisors of the agency most intimately connected to the Project Eagle sale. Although it was essentially a ‘value for money’ exercise the C&AG report highlighted serious conflicts of interest in the sale process, not least relating to the role of Frank Cushnahan, the former member of the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee of NAMA. The C&AG reported that NAMA underestimated the value of the loans, applied too high a discount and had failed to act when it discovered details of some £15m in “success fees” promised to Cushnahan, US law rm Brown Rudnick and Belfast solicitor, Ian Coulter of Tughans by US fund PIMCO before it withdrew from the sale in March 2014. Since then Cushnahan, Coulter and a former head of asset recovery at the agency, Ronnie Hanna, have been questioned by the National Crime Agency in connection with the deal while former first minister, Peter Robinson and his son Gareth, have also come under scrutiny for their role in the extraordinary Project Eagle affair. Hanna and Cushnahan were arrested in May 2016 while Coulter, a former head of the Confederation of British Industry in the North who was responsible for transferring some £5 million to the Isle of Man in late 2014 after the sale to Cerberus was completed was also subjected to a grilling by the NCA team. Property developer John Miskelly who admitted to the BBC some years ago that he had legitimately paid large sums of cash to Cushnahan, and had secretly taped his exchanges with the business consultant, was also arrested in 2017 as part of the NCA probe. Last month, it emerged that charges may now be brought against two of the nine people under investigation and there is intense speculation as to who, if anyone, will finally be brought to account over a property disposal that helped to Enrich Cerberus and associated accountancy, legal and other professionals at the expense of the public purse. Also intriguing is the recent decision by the DPP to withdraw charges against a former NAMA official who was accused of disclosing confidential information from the agency. In this case, NAMA executives made the complaint which led to the arrest of its former staff member Paul Pugh in 2013. Pugh was charged with intentionally disclosing loan and other details relating to builder, John McCabe and his UK company, McCabe Builders. Pugh was accused of sending the information to Gehane Tew k of London based Connaught & Whitehall Capital UK in June 2012. When the case came to court in recent months the DPP and investigating gardaí said that they were not proceeding with the prosecution for reasons that were not fully explained to the judge or the public. It appears that the NAMA executives whose complaint prompted the arrest of Pugh in the first place are now less than enthusiastic about pursuing the case, despite the five-year investigation into the matter. Not for the first time, NAMA has failed to disclose its reasons for not pursuing this case to conclusion. Frank Connolly

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Conflict in Corner

    A situation is unfolding in the Northern Ireland Royal Courts of Justice which calls into question the integrity of the Administration of Justice, the right to a fair hearing and fair procedures on which the entire system depends. It is the worst kept secret in legal circles in Northern Ireland and yet not one media organisation has chosen to run the story. On 9th March 2017 Justice Mark Horner, a well-regarded judge best known for a recent liberal judgment on abortion rights in the North, was asked by a litigant-in-person to recuse himself from a case involving Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc as it had been brought to the litigant’s attention that Justice Horner had a serious conflict of interest which he had failed to bring to the court’s attention at any stage while he sat as Judge on the case. Justice Horner was a director up until late 2011 and is currently a shareholder in TMKK Limited which was a financially-troubled client of the bank. On 14 March the litigant-in-person made an official complaint to the Lord Chief Justice’s office and has yet not received a substantive reply as the office seems wrongfooted. The Lord Chief Justice’s office seems nowhere close to convening the Tribunal envisaged in the Code of Practice on Judicial complaints. On 27 March Justice Horner recused himself from the litigant-in-person’s case giving a statement saying that the reason he recused himself was because the litigant in person would not accept his judgment. This is judicial nonsense. No judge ever should doubt the acceptance of his judgment by a party. The Lord Chief Justice’s office told Village: “Mr Justice Horner stated in open court that he was recusing himself in the case involving the Bank of Ireland and the personal litigant. He said he was satisfied that there was no question of actual bias or that he had any conflict of interest in the case, but that it was apparent to him that ‘the party would never feel able to accept [his] verdict’”. On 4 April in a separate case involving the same plaintiff i.e. Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc, the bank itself, presumably sensing the dangers of compromise and appeal, actually instructed its own QC, Patrick Good, to request that Justice Horner recuse himself from that case. Horner had little choice but to stand down from this case also. The same legal firm, C & H Jefferson now DWF, represented the plaintiff, Bank of Ireland (UK) Plc in both cases described above. It is obvious that the plaintiff was aware of the conflict of interest with Justice Horner as the judge had for many years been a director and is currently a shareholder in TMKK Limited which was a client of the bank. However, neither the bank nor its legal team made the court aware of the conflict though, as solicitors are officers of the court, it is normally their duty to do so. The solicitor who acted for the plaintiff in both cases seems not to have fulfilled that duty. She is no longer acting for her rm in either of the cases. After that Justice Horner stopped sitting on any cases involving Bank of Ireland in the Chancery court but moved to the Commercial Courts in September and has sat on a number of Bank of Ireland cases. On 4 october 2017, as Village was going to press, a Bank of Ireland case was listed in the Commercial Court [image C, 1] (Interestingly another case was listed for the same day (not involving Bank of Ireland) where the defendant is the current master of the High Court in Belfast, Ian Thomas Hardstaff, who was in partnership with the Harrison referred to in the list who is still a shareholder and director of TMKK Limited) [image C, 7]. Moreover Justice Horner also has dealings with The Northern Bank Ltd through TMKK Limited. Here too he sat on many cases and did not inform the parties of this. The defending party in one such case is aware of his recusal in the two Bank of Ireland cases. That defendant is currently appealing a case involving Northern Bank Ltd in which Justice Horner gave a judgment against them. They brought his conflict of interest with Northern Bank Ltd to the Appeal Judges’ attention and the court remitted the matter back to the Chancery Court as it is the appropriate court to determine such matters. Justice Horner resigned as a director of TMKK Ltd before applying for appointment to the High Court – though he and his wife both remain shareholders. Indeed his wife replaced him as a director. Relevant accounts (page 144 section 4 [image A]) for TMKK Ltd available from the Companies office show that it is indebted to Bank of Ireland and Northern Bank (now Danske bank). However, much more dramatically the company is insolvent. The final paragraph of the accounts entitled “Going concern” [image b] clearly states that TMKK Ltd is only trading at the discretion of Bank of Ireland. By any standard this Judge should not be hearing any cases involving Bank of Ireland. He has immense power and has given possession orders in favour of Bank of Ireland and Northern Bank while he has been seriously conflicted. This could have involved both commercial properties and family homes. All of his cases are on public record. Anyone who has had a case under Justice Horner involving Bank of Ireland or Northern Bank Ltd/Danske Bank may be able to have their judgment set aside due to failure to disclose a serious and fundamental conflict of interest. The Lord Chief Justice’s office notes that while the judge may be considering Queen’s bench actions which are listed for mention he is not now “adjudicating on any commercial or Chancery cases involving the Bank of Ireland”. The Lord Chief Justice’s office said it was “unable to comment further as the Justice (NI) Act 2002 provides information on complaints on judicial office holders is confidential and must

    Loading

    Read more