Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 5 Nov 2002

Vol. 556 No. 3

Priority Questions. - Company Law Related Matters.

Phil Hogan

Ceist:

62 Mr. Hogan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when she will receive completed reports of all inquiries pending under the companies Acts; the costs incurred to date in each case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20473/02]

Sixteen investigations into company law related matters have been initiated by the Tánaiste since she entered office in her previous term as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. In respect of three of these, the High Court appointed, on an application by the Tánaiste, inspectors under section 8 of the Companies Act, 1990. The High Court inspectors appointed to Ansbacher (Cayman) Limited presented their report to the High Court on Monday, 10 June 2002.

The National Irish Bank Limited and National Irish Bank Financial Services Limited section 8 inquiries are continuing. A further interim report was presented to the High Court on 24 July 2002. It is anticipated the final report will be submitted to the High Court in the first half of 2003. As in the case of Ansbacher (Cayman) Limited, the question of whether the reports are published is entirely a matter for the High Court. The High Court ordered the publication of the Ansbacher report.

One investigation under section 14 of the Companies Act, 1990, was completed in 1998. The report on this has been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Eleven investigations were initiated by the Tánaiste under section 19 of the Companies Act, 1990 and five of these have been concluded. Of the five investigations completed, two of the reports were passed to the DPP. The file in one case was returned and a number of summary prosecutions have since been successfully concluded.

One report provided an input into the successful application to the High Court for the appointment of inspectors under section 8 while the fourth report was passed to the relevant High Court inspectors. One report was completed in September 2002 and has been referred to the Director of Corporate Enforcement. The Department is considering whether this report should be referred to other authorities.

Four investigations under section 19 are ongoing.

Additional informationReports in respect of two of these four investigations are at a very advanced stage of completion. Two investigations were held up in legal appeals, on which a judgment was delivered on 5 June 2002. The High Court ruled on certain constitutional issues which had been referred back to the High Court by the Supreme Court. It is a matter for the Director of Corporate Enforcement to decide how to proceed on these latter investigations.

One investigation was undertaken under section 59 of the Insurance Act, 1989. This report has been completed and referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions as well as to the inspectors undertaking the section 8 investigation into that company.

The costs incurred since 1997 on company investigations initiated by or on behalf of my Department currently amount to €9.6 million. This amount does not include the salary costs of Civil Service staff working on a number of these investigations. Similarly, the major proportion of the legal costs relating to the investigations is being borne by the Vote of the Chief State Solicitor. Most of this €9.6 million derives from the costs to date of the High Court inspectors appointed under section 8 – National Irish Bank at €4.8 million and Ansbacher at €3.5 million.

The question of recovering costs from the section 8 investigations does not arise until such time as the inspectors complete their investigations. Section 19 as originally enacted did not provide for the recoupment of costs. This has now changed with the enactment of the Company Law Enforcement Act, 2001. In respect of the Ansbacher investigation, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform presented a motion to the High Court in July 2002 seeking to have Ansbacher and seven other companies dealt with in the inspectors' report made liable for the costs of the investigation. Consideration of this motion is ongoing before the High Court.

We did not get much information on the reports. Which report was completed in September and is being considered for referral to the Director of Public Prosecutions? When is the NIB report likely to be concluded? Has the Minister a view on who should pay the costs of the Ansbacher Cayman report, which came before the House in July?

With regard to the Anbacher (Cayman) Limited report, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform presented a motion to the High Court in July 2002 seeking to have Ansbacher and seven other companies dealt with in the inspectors' report made liable for the costs of the report. The seven companies are Hamilton Ross Company Limited, Guiness and Mahon (Ireland) Limited, Guinness Mahon and Company Limited, London, Henry Ansbacher Holdings plc, Cement Roadstone Holdings plc, Bank of Ireland Private Banking Limited and Irish Investment Bank. Consideration of the motion was deferred to October 2002. The costs of the report are estimated at €3.5 million approximately.

The matter came before the courts on 14 October 2002. John Gordon SC for Ansbacher told the court that Ansbacher believed the Minister should also seek costs from the Central Bank and wanted the court to join the Central Bank as a third party to the Minister's motion. Ansbacher argued that it had taken over the Ansbacher bank only in 1988 but that the Central Bank had been aware of problems in the bank 15 years before that and was among the entities criticised in the inspectors' report. The question of the inclusion of the Central Bank came up for hearing on 1 November but I do not yet have information on that. The Minister maintains that the costs should be paid by Ansbacher.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is pursuing costs in this matter and I hope the same will happen with the other reports. The Minister of State's reply did not give much more information than the Tánaiste gave on 21 March, the last time she answered questions on this matter. That is a long time ago and little progress has been made. Does the Minister agree that these inquiries are taking a considerable period of time and are incurring more costs than is necessary? Does he accept that the costs incurred to date are enormous and that action needs to be taken by the Department and the courts to bring the inquiries to a conclusion as soon as possible?

The costs are substantial and amount to approximately €9.6 million at present. However, it is important to remember that the costs will be sought from the companies that are involved.

Barr
Roinn