Businessman Patrick Kearney says his case against Davy 16 hasn’t changed, High Court hears

Businessman Patrick Kearney has not changed his claims against Davy Stockbroker and 16 of his former employees since the day he brought charges against them over alleged fraudulent concealment, the High Court heard.

r Kearney says he took on the case after the central bank slapped Davy with a record €4.1million fine last year for regulatory violations related to retail account trading.

That came from an investigative report that said Davy prioritized providing an opportunity for 16 employees to make a personal financial gain while handling a client’s bonds over ensuring compliance with its regulatory obligations.

Mr Kearney and his company Kilmona Holdings claim that in 2014 J&E Davy and the 16 former employees made a secret profit of around 9.3 million buyers. Davy and the 16 deny the claims.

This week, the 16 asked the court to throw out the Kearney/Kilmona lawsuit as doomed based on Mr. Kearney’s own pleadings.

That has been argued from a previous case he brought against Dav from 2015,y reportedly selling its bonds at undervalue and trading In a conflict of interest, Mr Kearney was aware that his bonds were being sold to the “O’Connell Partnership” and he knew it consisted of the former Davy 16.

This 2015 case was eventually settled.

On WednesdayMartin Hayden SC, for Mr Kearney, said his side had in no way “abandoned our case”.

He dismissed an argument on behalf of the 16 that Mr. Kearney knew who was involved at the time they were sold.

What Mr. Kearney knew, and was told at the time, was that Davy’s staff financed the purchase, but he was specifically assured that there was no connection between Davy and thThe buyer, although this was not the case, said the lawyer.

Mr Hayden said the 16 personal defendants mischaracterized the Kearney lawsuit, which was consistent in its position in the previous trials and in this case.

Distinguishing between showing that the Davy employees were lenders to the purchase and who the buyers were is fundamental to this case, he said.

The O’Connell partnership was created specifically to cover up what was happening with the bonds, he said. There are no proceeds from this partnership and it is not known what they received, but we do know that the total profit was €9.3m, he said.

Lawyers for the 16 former workers had claimed the distinction between buyers and lenders was “a yarn,” but it wasn’t “If there’s chatter here, it’s not my client,” said the lawyer.

Mr Hayden, who also reviewed some of last year’s central bank reports that fined Davy €4.1 million, said his client relied on the contents of that report to make his case.

The attorney also said the 16 only applied to have the case dropped after Davy unsuccessful with a controversial discovery request earlier this year.

In response, Marcus Dowling SC said for the 16, regarding who made the most money from this transaction, his clients were “in the dime”.

Including a debt write-off of 17 millionMr Kearney actually made a profit of €21 million from the 2015 case and the settlement, he said.

Judge Michael Twomey reserves his decision. Businessman Patrick Kearney says his case against Davy 16 hasn’t changed, High Court hears

Fry Electronics Team

Fry is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button