BUSINESSMAN BREIFNE O’Brien has estimated assets so far of some €36 million while his liabilities to date, including charges over assets, potential legal claims and loans, amount to some €20 million, according to figures supplied by him to the Commercial Court yesterday.
Mr O’Brien, who allegedly operated a “pyramid” investment scheme over some 15 years, misappropriating millions from several investors to fund his lifestyle and business interests, yesterday agreed to the continuation by Mr Justice Peter Kelly of court orders restraining him from reducing his assets below €20 million.
Mr O’Brien also supplied a three-paragraph affidavit and statement of affairs to the court. The affidavit related to proceedings against him by a long-time friend, businessman David O’Reilly, who is among several people seeking the return of money given for investment.
Mr O’Brien said he had received some $3 million and €1.6 million from Mr O’Reilly, all of which was transferred to the London bank account of another man, Brian Reid, “to whom I owed substantial sums of money”.
In relation to his schedule of assets, Mr O’Brien said the values attributed to these were estimated and some financial institutions had yet to reply to his solicitor’s request for details of his accounts.
Gabriel Gavigan, for Mr O’Brien, said seven institutions had replied last Friday and this information and any further information would be given to investors. Counsel said Mr O’Brien had substantially complied with the court order to disclose his assets.
John Hennessy SC, for the Dowley brothers, said the investors remained very anxious to know exactly where their money had gone. The schedule of assets was lacking in certainty in some matters, he said.
In his schedule of assets, Mr O’Brien disclosed some 10 investors are suing him for some €15 million. He listed the claimants as Evan Newell, brothers Robert and Louis Dowley, David O’Reilly, the Bell family and also named five other potential claimants – Patrick Doyle, Suzie C Callaghan, Martin O’Brien, Eamon Connor and Robert Dennison. Addresses were not given. Family members are also listed as possible claimants, but no sums were provided.
Mr O’Brien’s listed assets include properties jointly owned with his wife, Fiona Nagle, including their family home in Glenageary, and an apartment at Vico Road, Dalkey, both Co Dublin; a house in Barbados; an apartment in Sandyford, Dublin, and a 20 per cent share in three apartments under construction at the G Tower in Dubai. Some of those assets are subject to bank charges.
His other assets include syndicated property investments in Berlin, Boston, Spain and Belize and several investments owned with others, including his father. He has listed commercial property held in his own name at addresses in Monkstown, Sandyford, Reading and Paris.
Other assets include personally owned shares in nominee accounts and in certificate form, including shares in several banks.
Further assets include art works valued at €50,000, an Aston Martin car valued at €70,000, €1.3 million in shares in Maltese Holdings, Jersey, and €2.2 million in Fund Investments Anglo Irish Private.
Mr Justice Kelly was told Mr O’Brien’s wife is to apply next week to vary the freezing orders to meet the expenses of her household and her five children ranging in age from two to 17 years. Bernard Donleavy, for Ms Nagle, said the freezing orders had frozen the household accounts. His client would also be seeking to be made a notice party to the proceedings against her husband.
The judge will hear Ms Nagle’s applications next Monday and will also deal with proceedings in which various investors are seeking judgment against him for large sums given to him.
Proceedings were brought against Mr O’Brien, Invergarry, Silchester Road, Glenageary, last month just days after Mr O’Brien told solicitor Brian Quigley, representing some investors, he had been “living a lie” for up to 15 years in relation to investments made for others and calculated his total liabilities to 11 people of €16-€19 million.
Mr O’Brien allegedly said it was easy to “pull suckers in when the economy was booming”, but recent events made it impossible for him to continue his method of operation.
