Judgment: 2002-03-01 · Court archive

Supreme Court upholds seven-year company management ban on Cork liquidator

Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Edmund P Cahill
  • Dr Michael Grimes
  • Mr Justice Francis D Murphy
What

Supreme Court upholds seven-year company management ban on Cork liquidator

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Cork
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Mr Justice Francis D Murphy, delivering the Supreme Court judgment, held that the inescapable conclusion was that the material included CB Readymix's books and records and that their destruction was intended to deprive the official liquidator of access to them.

The Supreme Court has upheld a seven-year disqualification imposed on Dr Michael Grimes over his conduct while purporting to act as liquidator of Cork company CB Readymix Ltd.

CB Readymix, which operated a sand and gravel business, encountered financial difficulties including substantial Revenue liabilities. The company had been struck off the register when it purported to appoint Dr Grimes as liquidator in January 1996. The courts later ruled that his appointment was invalid, and Edmund P Cahill ultimately became official liquidator.

The central issue in the disqualification proceedings was Dr Grimes' handling of the company's books and records. Evidence showed that he had possession of company records but later disposed of them. He told the courts that he placed about two and a half sacks of documents out with rubbish after concluding that he had no duty to keep them.

Mr Justice Francis D Murphy, delivering the Supreme Court judgment, held that the inescapable conclusion was that the material included CB Readymix's books and records and that their destruction was intended to deprive the official liquidator of access to them.

The court described that conduct as extremely serious. It accepted that Dr Grimes had not acted maliciously and had said his objective was to preserve employment at the business. However, the court found that his belief that this could justify destroying records showed a fundamentally mistaken view of a liquidator's responsibilities.

The Supreme Court also rejected his argument that company law disqualification provisions could not apply because he had never been validly appointed liquidator. It held that the legislation extended to a person acting as a de facto liquidator.

The High Court had barred Dr Grimes for seven years from acting as a liquidator, receiver or examiner. It allowed him to act as an auditor, director or company secretary only under specified restrictions, including limits on his possession of company books and records.

The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal and affirmed those orders.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review