Wallace -v- Cassidy & ors [2016] IEHC 689 (02 December 2016)
Each respondent, while director, engaged in or was complicit in systematic fraud, breach of duty, and lack of commercial probity, justifying disqualification under s.160(2)(a),(b),(d) Companies Act 1990 (now s.842 Companies Act 2014).
- Citation
- [2016] IEHC 689
- Parties
- Applicant: Kieran Wallace; Respondent: Harry Cassidy; Respondent: John Whyte; Respondent: John Mulholland
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 02 December 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Disqualification Order Under Companies Act / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- disqualification orders granted against all respondents
- Legal Topics
- Director Disqualification, Fraud, Breach of Duty, Corporate Governance, Mi FID Compliance
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kieran Wallace
Applicant
Harry Cassidy
Respondent
John Whyte
Respondent
John Mulholland
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Disqualification Order Under Companies Act / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether respondents should be disqualified as company directors under s.160(2) Companies Act 1990 for fraud, breach of duty, and unfitness
- 2 Whether restriction order under s.150 Companies Act 1990 is appropriate as alternative
Ratio Decidendi
Each respondent, while director, engaged in or was complicit in systematic fraud, breach of duty, and lack of commercial probity, justifying disqualification under s.160(2)(a),(b),(d) Companies Act 1990 (now s.842 Companies Act 2014).
Court Disposition
disqualification orders granted against all respondents
Orders
- Harry Cassidy disqualified for 14 years under s.842(a),(b),(d) Companies Act 2014
- John Whyte disqualified for 10 years under s.842(a),(b),(d) Companies Act 2014
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment