BUSINESSMAN PHILIP Lynch told his daughter in a phone call he would not proceed with a deal to buy lands for €25.3 million in 2007 if AIB had recourse to him for that sum, the Commercial Court was told yesterday.
Judith Whelan, a daughter of Mr Lynch, who is chief executive of the One51 investment group, said her father gave her that message on February 7th, 2007, the day before she signed documents for the €25.3 million loan on behalf of six members of the Lynch family, including herself and her father.
She said AIB was on February 7th looking to have recourse to her father and businessman Gerard Conlan for the loan but her father said that was “unacceptable”.
She believed others were acting on foot of what her father had said.
She was being cross-examined by counsel for AIB, in proceedings by the Lynch family against AIB and two firms of solicitors, LK Shields and Matheson Ormsby Prentice (MOP), aimed at preventing AIB securing €25.3 million judgment orders against them.
The plaintiffs are: Philip Lynch and his wife Eileen, the Curragh, Co Kildare; their daughters Judith Whelan, Leinster Wood, Carton Demesne, Maynooth, Co Kildare; Therese Lynch, Pembroke Park, Dublin; Philippa Lynch, Burlington Gardens, Burlington Road, Dublin; and their son Paul Lynch, Oakley Road, Ranelagh, Dublin.Separate but related proceedings by AIB seeking €25.3 million judgment against Gerard Conlan,Bridalwood House, Forenaughts, Naas, Co Kildare, will be heard later.
The proceedings arise from an alleged co-ownership and profit agreement between Mr Conlan and the Lynch family in relation to the purchase of 86 acres at Kilbarry, Waterford.
The family claim they entered the loan on the basis AIB’s recourse was confined to the lands at Waterford. They also claim that, between the two defendant law firms, LK Shields as their solicitors and MOP, representing Mr Conlan, they were collectively led to believe on February 8th, 2007, they were signing a deal which would involve AIB having recourse only to the lands.
The defendants deny the claims and AIB contends it is entitled to €25.3 million judgment orders against all of the plaintiffs and Mr Conlan.
The family claim 24 hours before the loan facility was signed by Ms Whelan on February 8th, 2007, for the rest of the family, a facility letter was put in front of them containing a clause confining the bank’s recourse to Mr Lynch and Mr Conlan.
That clause was not included in the final loan facility letter of February 8th. The family claim they were entitled to rely on lawyers who, they claim, interpreted that deletion as meaning Mr Lynch and Mr Conlan were “out of the equation” and recourse was limited to the lands.
The case continues.
