The High Court has ordered James Egan and Adrian Murphy to disclose documents in several categories in a claim by Columbia Lake Partners Growth Lending (Luxco) SARL concerning an alleged VAT liability in the Shaw Education Group. The ruling addressed competing motions for discovery; it did not decide the underlying claim or the defendants’ liability.
Columbia says it lent up to €6.75 million to Shaw Education Group plc (SEG), with two subsidiaries guaranteeing sums advanced. After Columbia demanded €5,559,255.56 in January 2019, SEG and associated companies entered examinership. A court-approved scheme followed, under which Columbia received €1,299,754. Columbia alleges that a subsidiary, SAL, had an approximately €450,000 VAT liability that the defendants concealed, and that representations about the liability affected its lending and enforcement decisions. The defendants deny much of the claim and dispute the alleged liability.
Justice Brian O’Moore ordered discovery in categories 3, 4 and 6, covering documents about SAL’s potential or actual VAT liability, related advice and communications with the Revenue Commissioners. He set 30 June 2019 as the end date for each category. He found that 9 January 2019, when the examinership petitions were presented, was too early because the group was then maintaining that VAT was not payable. He also considered documents about possible Revenue concerns after the schemes were approved, but found that extending the period to the end of 2019 was not justified.
For category 5, Columbia sought documents about due diligence by any party considering financing or investment in SEG, SAL or AFTEL. The judge rejected that broader request, including records concerning other prospective investors, finding those dealings could distract from the issues between Columbia and the defendants. He ordered discovery in the narrower form offered by the defendants, limited to due diligence by Columbia from 1 June to 4 August 2017 and by Octopus Investments Ltd from 1 June 2017 to 31 December 2018.
The court also set periods for category 8. Documents about alternatives to examinership must cover 1 July 2018 to 9 January 2019; documents about refinancing attempts must cover 1 January 2018 to 9 January 2019. For category 8(ii), the judge ordered documents evidencing damage to the value of SEG, SAL or AFTEL during 4 August 2017 to 9 January 2019 connected to specified matters in the defendants’ replies to particulars. Those documents need not have been created during that period. The judge reserved the question of whether to impose an end date for document creation, and any other matters arising from the decision, for a hearing on 22 June 2021.