A dispute between two sisters and one of their brothers over a proposed €67 million sale of a block of apartments on Pembroke Road in Dublin has come before the Commercial Court.
The proceedings between sisters Anna Walker, Glencree Road, Enniskerry, Co Wicklow, and Eleanor Lawlor, Temple Road, Dartry, against their brother Dr Goodwin McDonnell, Dalguise, Monkstown, Co Dublin, arise from the sisters' wish to sell Finsbury House, a block of rented apartments at 79 and 81 Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge.
An offer of some €67 million had been received for the property, which is co-owned by the sisters and their brothers Angus McDonnell and Dr Goodwin McDonnell. Angus McDonnell, Ballymoney Park, Kilbride, is not a party to the case but was described as having consented to the proceedings being brought by his sisters.
The case was mentioned before Mr Justice Peter Kelly yesterday. He said the siblings were "at loggerheads" and urged the sides to try to resolve "this unhappy chapter". The judge returned the case to next week when, if there is no agreement, he will fix a trial date.
The sisters claim Finsbury House was passed to them and their brothers in 1985 by means of a family trust which their parents had controlled for many years. They claim the premises was developed, managed and controlled by the four siblings as an investment property.
They say they want to realise their investment in the property and that certain offers had been received for the "arms-length" disposal of the premises.
They say Dr McDonnell was unwilling to avail of such offers or to agree to dispose of his interest in the premises. The sisters say they believe that in the circumstances, it is fair and reasonable that the premises be sold and the proceedings be divided between the four siblings, after deduction of the costs of the sale.
Dr McDonnell, in an affidavit, said he believed the legal action was unfortunate and misconceived in that his views should have been established before the case was embarked upon.
He said he had indicated to his sisters in September 2006 that he was at that time unwilling to sell the property. This was because, at that time, the property had been valued at €45 million and he believed its true value was much higher. Since then, a prospective purchaser had expressed willingness to offer more than €65 million for the property, he said.
He said that subject to being satisfied with conditions of sale, he was willing to entertain the expression of interest at the valuation of more than €65 million.
Dr McDonnell also said he believed there was no need to carry out substantial renovation of the property. More than €2 million had been spent on refurbishing and improving the property since 2002, he said.
In an additional affidavit, Ms Walker said they had been advised last month that the €67 million offer was the best offer likely to be received. She also rejected the claim that the proceedings were misconceived.
