The Court of Appeal has dismissed liquidator Anthony J. Fitzpatrick’s appeal against a High Court decision fixing his remuneration and expenses for the voluntary liquidation of Lucca Food Trading Company Limited at €37,883.69, inclusive of VAT. The appeal judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Robert Haughton on 21 May 2021, with two other judges agreeing.
The High Court had reduced the amount claimed and directed Mr Fitzpatrick to pay Revenue €42,116.31 from the liquidation funds. He paid that sum after the Court of Appeal declined to continue a stay on payment. The appeal focused on whether the High Court had wrongly cut the claimed hours by about half. Other grounds, including a challenge to the direction to pay Revenue a dividend, were not pursued.
Revenue was the only creditor entitled to a dividend in the circumstances. It opposed the claim, arguing that the liquidation was relatively small and straightforward: the restaurant business had been sold before Mr Fitzpatrick’s appointment, and the remaining work included employee payments and proceedings to restrict the company’s two directors. Those were Revenue’s submissions, not findings that every aspect of the work was unnecessary.
The Court of Appeal said the High Court had applied the correct legal principles and was entitled to find the liquidation was a routine “pre-pack” case rather than a complex one. It emphasized that a liquidator must justify the work, time and expenses claimed, with contemporaneous records helping demonstrate what was done and why. Mr Fitzpatrick had not produced contemporaneous time records, and the court noted that the section 56 report itself was not exhibited.
The judgment also addressed disputed consultancy and legal costs. The High Court had allowed €4,495.40 of the €9,790.80 claimed for consultancy, and €2,700.33 of €10,080.83 claimed for legal and professional fees. The Court of Appeal upheld the approach, including the exclusion of a €1,845 payment made in error from liquidation funds. It found no basis to disturb the High Court’s assessment of the evidence or its reductions to the hours claimed.
The appeal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal proposed that Revenue receive its appeal costs, to be paid personally by Mr Fitzpatrick because he brought the appeal in his own interest. He could dispute that proposed costs order by notifying the court office within 14 days of electronic delivery; the judgment does not state whether he did so.