Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 10 Dec 1996

Vol. 472 No. 6

Written Answers. - Sale of Company.

Noel Davern

Ceist:

191 Mr. Davern asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment if his attention has been drawn to a newspaper article (details supplied) regarding a company (details supplied) in County Tipperary; if so, if he has requested any of his inspectors under the Companies Acts to investigate the company in relation to the manner in which it was sold by the receiver; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23967/96]

Noel Davern

Ceist:

192 Mr. Davern asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment if his attention has been drawn to the purchase of Tipperary Crystal and to the dissatisfaction expressed regarding the way in which the sale was conducted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23968/96]

Minister for Enterprise and Employment (Mr. R. Bruton)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 191 and 192 together.

I have seen the report in the Sunday Business Post of 1 December, 1996 regarding the sale of Tipperary Crystal. A receiver was appointed on 10 October, 1996, over the assets of the Tipperary Crystal companies, namely, Crystal Designs of Tipperary Limited; Tipperary China, Crystal, Porcelain, Silver and Gold Company Limited and Tipperary Crystal Manufacturing Company (Sales) Limited. The receiver was appointed by Yeoman International, a debenture holder. The receiver is still in place.

I am informed that shortly after his appointment the receiver sought to sell the business. Minority shareholders made an application to the High Court for an injunction to prevent the sale to the purchaser, Asdon Limited. Their application was denied on 21 October, 1996.

About a year prior to the appointment of the receiver, the minority shareholders instituted proceedings against the company under section 205 of the Companies Act, 1963 — remedy for oppression of minority shareholders. After the receiver was appointed they applied to the High Court to join the receiver, the debenture holder and the purchaser in the section 205 proceedings. Their application was refused on 18 November 1996. In addition, on that date an application to set aside the sale was denied by the High Court, although it was held that the matter could be dealt with in the context of the full hearing of the section 205 application.

I do not intend to appoint an inspector under the Companies Acts to examine the manner of the sale of the business by the receiver at this time. The issue was examined by the High Court on two occasions and still forms part of the section 205 action referred to above.

I understand from Forbairt that, prior to the appointment of the receiver, the company was experiencing cash flow difficulties and was endeavouring to put together a financial restructuring package. I understand that the threat to employment has been averted by the sale of the business.