Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd v Quinn Investments Sweden AB & ors [2012] IESC 51 (24 October 2012)

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd v Quinn Investments Sweden AB & ors [2012] IESC 51 (24 October 2012)

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence for the High Court to find beyond reasonable doubt that Sean Quinn Jr. participated in the payment of US$500,000 in breach of the court order, justifying the finding of contempt and the punitive sentence. However, the coercive orders imposed went beyond the scope of the specific contempt found against him and were not justified in the absence of due process and specific allegations or findings.

Citation
[2012] IESC 51
Parties
Respondent/plaintiff: Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd; Respondent/plaintiff: Quinn Investments Sweden AB; Respondent/plaintiff: Leif Baecklund; Appellant/defendant: Sean Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Ciara Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Colette Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Sean Quinn Junior; Appellant/defendant: Brenda Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Aoife Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Stephen Kelly; Appellant/defendant: Peter Darragh Quinn; Appellant/defendant: Niall McPartland; Appellant/defendant: Indian Trust AB; Appellant/defendant: Forfar Overseas SA; Appellant/defendant: Lockerbie Investments SA; Appellant/defendant: Clonmore Investments SA; Appellant/defendant: Marfine Investments Limited; Appellant/defendant: Blandun Enterprises Limited; Appellant/defendant: Mecon FZE; Appellant/defendant: CJSC Vneshkonsult; Appellant/defendant: OOO Stroitelnye Tecknologii; Appellant/defendant: OOO RLC-Developments; Appellant/defendant: Karen Woods
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed in respect of contempt finding and imprisonment; coercive orders quashed as against Sean Quinn Jr.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Injunctive Relief, Asset Protection, Enforcement of Court Orders, Banking Litigation, Mareva Injunction
Civil Procedure Banking Law Contempt of Court Injunctive Relief Asset Protection Enforcement of Court Orders Banking Litigation Mareva Injunction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd

Respondent/plaintiff

Quinn Investments Sweden AB

Respondent/plaintiff

Leif Baecklund

Respondent/plaintiff

Sean Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Ciara Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Colette Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Sean Quinn Junior

Appellant/defendant

Brenda Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Aoife Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Stephen Kelly

Appellant/defendant

Peter Darragh Quinn

Appellant/defendant

Niall McPartland

Appellant/defendant

Indian Trust AB

Appellant/defendant

Forfar Overseas SA

Appellant/defendant

Lockerbie Investments SA

Appellant/defendant

Clonmore Investments SA

Appellant/defendant

Marfine Investments Limited

Appellant/defendant

Blandun Enterprises Limited

Appellant/defendant

Mecon FZE

Appellant/defendant

CJSC Vneshkonsult

Appellant/defendant

OOO Stroitelnye Tecknologii

Appellant/defendant

OOO RLC-Developments

Appellant/defendant

Karen Woods

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence to find Sean Quinn Jr. in contempt of court for the payment of US$500,000 from QPU to Ms. Puga
  2. 2 Whether the High Court exceeded its powers by imposing coercive orders beyond the specific contempt found against Sean Quinn Jr.
  3. 3 Whether the order for indefinite imprisonment was justified

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence for the High Court to find beyond reasonable doubt that Sean Quinn Jr. participated in the payment of US$500,000 in breach of the court order, justifying the finding of contempt and the punitive sentence. However, the coercive orders imposed went beyond the scope of the specific contempt found against him and were not justified in the absence of due process and specific allegations or findings.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed in respect of contempt finding and imprisonment; coercive orders quashed as against Sean Quinn Jr.

Orders

  • The appeal against the finding of contempt and the three-month imprisonment is dismissed.
  • The coercive orders made against Sean Quinn Jr. beyond the specific contempt found are quashed.