The High Court has entered a dispute involving Thomond Healthcare Holdings Ltd and Sarsfield Healthcare S.A.R.L. in its Commercial List, finding that the proceedings qualify as commercial proceedings under the Rules of the Superior Courts.
Mr Justice David Barniville made the ruling on 27 April 2020 on the papers, during COVID-19 restrictions. The case was brought by Gerard Blake, John Webb-O’Rourke, David Lehane, Kieran O’Regan and Able Fancy Investment against David Christie, Richard Hunt, Zena Namih, Zest Equity Holdco S.A.R.L., Julien Lambert, Richard Butler and Gianni De Bortoli.
The applicants seek orders under section 212 of the Companies Act 2014 over alleged oppression and alleged disregard of their interests as members of the two companies. The ruling does not determine those allegations. The companies trade as Zest Healthcare and develop primary care centres in Ireland in conjunction with the HSE.
The respondents sought entry to the Commercial List without accepting the applicants’ claims and without prejudice to their stated intention to challenge the Irish courts’ jurisdiction over claims concerning Sarsfield, its members or directors. They argued that the dispute arose from or related to business documents, contracts and disputes, and that the claims’ value was at least €1 million. The applicants consented to entry.
The judge found the proceedings were commercial proceedings within Order 63A, rule 1(a)(i), and ordered their entry on that basis. He also treated the application hearing as the initial directions hearing. The ruling did not decide the jurisdiction challenge or set the further directions sought by the parties.
Instead, the judge directed a remote hearing at 11.45am on 30 April 2020 to address those directions, with a 30-minute limit. The respondents’ solicitors were directed to send the registrar by 5pm on 29 April a booklet of open correspondence and the parties’ competing proposed directions. The judge urged the parties to consider mediation, but made no mediation order and did not adjourn the case for mediation. The entry application costs were ordered to be costs in the cause; costs relating to the directions hearing were left for decision after that hearing.