Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Press Statement Presentation of the Ansbacher Report to the High Court The Director of Corporate Enforcement, Mr Paul Appleby, has today welcomed the completion of the Inspectors’ Inquiry into Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. and the presentation of the Report to the High Court. He understands that the Court has ordered: that a copy be forwarded to the Director of Corporate Enforcement and to the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment; that the Report not to be published or its contents disclosed and that proceedings on the Report be adjourned to Monday, 24 June 2002. The Director of Corporate Enforcement has commented on this development as follows: “The Ansbacher Inquiry has been a very difficult and prolonged assignment. The completion of the Inquiry has required a huge effort to overcome a number of inherent obstacles, including the restrictive secrecy laws governing financial operations based in the Cayman Islands, an absence of certain documentation, the death of some of the principals involved and the passage of time since Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. began conducting business in Ireland in the early 1970s. I want to acknowledge the substantial commitment of the Inspectors and their support staff in bringing the Inquiry to a successful conclusion. Judge Sean O’Leary, Mr Michael Cush, S.C., Ms Noreen Mackey and Mr Paul Rowan deserve our thanks. The former Inspector, Mr Justice Declan Costello, also merits our appreciation for getting the Inquiry successfully started. The earlier work of Mr Gerry Ryan and his team in the Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment who undertook the preliminary examination of Ansbacher’s affairs in the State also greatly contributed to the successful establishment of the Inquiry. As Director of Corporate Enforcement, my immediate task is to study the Report and determine, in conjunction with my staff and legal advisers, what should be our appropriate response. One of the first issues to be considered by the Court will be the question of its publication, and I hope that it will prove possible for the Court to publish the Report in full at an early date. Pending further Court proceedings which will determine the extent to which the Report will be published, the contents of the Report will remain confidential as ordered by the High Court this morning. In order not to prejudice these proceedings in any way, I will also be refraining from further public comment in the interim.” 10 June 2002 ENDS/. Editor’s Note Completion of the Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. Report The existence of the “Ansbacher Accounts” first came to public notice in early 1997 during the proceedings of the Tribunal of Inquiry (Dunnes Payments) which was chaired by Mr Justice Brian McCracken. The Inquiry Report which was published in August 1997 dealt with the activity of Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. in Ireland to the extent that it was possible to do so within its terms of reference. In January 1998, the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment, Ms Mary Harney, T.D., decided to examine the books and documents of Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. under section 19 of the Companies Act 1990 and appointed Mr Gerry Ryan of her Department for that purpose. Following the completion of Mr Ryan’s Report, the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment decided in July 1999 to petition the High Court for the appointment of Inspectors to Ansbacher (Cayman) Ltd. This petition was granted on 22 September 1999. A copy of the relevant High Court Order of that date, as amended on 5 October 1999, is attached at Appendix 1. Following the later resignation of Mr Justice Costello on health grounds, the High Court agreed in December 2000, on the application of the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment, to appoint Judge Sean O’Leary and Mr Michael Cush, S.C., as Inspectors in his place. The completion of the Inspectors’ Report and its submission to the High Court today (10 June 2002) represents the end of this phase of the process. It now falls to the High Court to consider, in the light of the contents of the Report, what further action should be taken by it. Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Companies Act 1990 (as amended respectively by sections 24, 25 and 26 of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001) outline the options for consideration by the High Court. A consolidated version of sections 11 to 13 inclusive is at Appendix 2. APPENDIX 1 Terms of Reference of the Ansbacher Inquiry THE HIGH COURT 1999 No. 163 COS Wednesday the 22nd day of September 1999 BEFORE MR. JUSTICE JOHNSON IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACTS 1963 TO 1990 AND IN THE MATTER OF PART II OF THE COMPANIES ACTS 1990 AND Ss. 8 AND 17. AND IN THE MATTER OF ANSBACHER (CAYMAN) LIMITED (FORMERLY GUINNESS MAHON CAYMAN TRUST LIMITED ANSBACHER LIMITED AND CAYMAN INTERNATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY LIMITED) ON THE APPLICATION OF THE MINISTER FOR ENTERPRISE TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT Upon the application of Counsel for the Applicant made unto the Court on this day pursuant to Notice of Motion herein filed on the 30th day of July 1999 The Honourable Mr Justice Frederick H Morris the President of the High Court assigned The Honourable Mr Justice Richard Johnson to hear the application Upon reading the said Notice of Motion the Affidavits of service of John Lawless Brian Cox Christina Loughlin Hal McGuckin all filed in Court on this day and the documents and exhibits in said Affidavits referred to the Affidavit of Gerard Ryan filed in Court on this day the Affidavit of Paul Appleby sworn on the 26th day of July 1999 the documents and exhibits in said Affidavit referred to the second Affidavit of Paul Appleby filed in Court on this day (seeking inter alia the appointment of the persons named hereunder as Inspectors) the documents and exhibits in said Affidavit referred to and on hearing said Counsel there being no appearance on behalf of the Company in the title hereof. The Court doth deem good and sufficient service the service effected by the said Hal McGuckin and referred to in his Affidavit filed in Court on this day IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Section 8 of the Companies Act 1990 that the persons named hereunder be appointed as Inspectors to investigate the affairs of Ansbacher (Cayman) Limited (formerly Guinness Mahon Cayman Trust Limited Ansbacher Limited and Cayman International Bank and Trust Company Limited) a) The Honourable Mr Justice Declan Costello b) Ms Noreen P Mackey Barrister-at-Law c) Paul F Rowan Chartered Accountant IT IS ORDERED that the said Inspectors investigate and report to the Court on the affairs of the Company in the title hereof and in particular (a) to examine and define the nature and extent of the Company’s Irish business from 1971 to date i.e. the business carried out in the State or any other business carried out on behalf of Irish residents whether in the State or elsewhere (b) to identify as far as possible all of the parties who were either officers (including shadow directors) and agents of the Company clients of the Company or who otherwise assisted in the carrying out of the business at the relevant time (c) to examine whether the Companies Acts 1963-1990 were breached by the company its officers (including shadow directors) agents or third parties at the relevant time and if so to identify the provisions involved and the persons in default in each case (d) to examine whether the affairs of the Company were conducted with intent to defraud its creditors or the creditors of any other person or otherwise for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose and if so to identify the statutory provisions involved and the persons in default in each case (e) to report on any related matters IT IS ORDERED that the Applicant be at liberty to furnish to the sole chairman of the Tribunal of Enquiry (Payments to Mr Charles Haughey and Mr Michael J Lowry) the exhibits referred to at paragraph 16 of the Affidavit of Paul Appleby sworn on the 26th day of July 1999 And IT IS ORDERED that the restrictions on the disclosure of the exhibits referred to in the said Affidavit of Paul Appleby sworn on the 26th day of July 1999 be continued save those opened and read in open Court on this day REGISTRAR Chief State Solicitor Solicitor for the Applicant APPENDIX 2 Amended Version of Sections 11 to 13 of the Companies Act 1990 Inspector's reports. 11.—(1) Inspectors appointed under section 7 or 8 may, and if so directed by the court shall, make interim reports to the court and on the conclusion of the investigation, shall make a final report to the court. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), an inspector appointed under section 7 or 8 may at any time in the course of his investigation, without the necessity of making an interim report, inform the court of matters coming to his knowledge as a result of the investigation tending to show that an offence has been committed. (3) Where inspectors were appointed under section 7 or 8, the court shall furnish a copy of every report of theirs to the Minister and the court may, if it thinks fit— ( a ) forward a copy of any report made by the inspectors to the company's registered office, ( b ) furnish a copy on request and payment of the prescribed fee to— (i) any member of the company or other body corporate which is the subject of the report; (ii) any person whose conduct is referred to in the report; (iii) the auditors of that company or body corporate; (iv) the applicants for the investigation; (v) any other person (including an employee) whose financial interests appear to the court to be affected by the matters dealt with in the report whether as a creditor of the company or body corporate or otherwise; (vi) the Central Bank, in any case in which the report of the inspectors relates, wholly or partly, to the affairs of the holder of a licence under section 9 of the Central Bank Act, 1971; (ba) furnish a copy to – (i) an appropriate authority in relation to any of the matters referred to in section 21(1)(a) to (fb); or (ii) a competent authority as defined in section 21(3)(a) to (i); and ( c ) cause any such report to be printed and published. (4) Where the court so thinks proper it may direct that a particular part of a report made by virtue of this section be omitted from a copy forwarded or furnished under subsection (3) (a), (b) or (ba), or from the report as printed and published under subsection (3) (c). Proceedings on inspectors report. Expenses of investigation of company's affairs. 12.—(1) Having considered a report made under section 11, the court may make such order as it deems fit in relation to matters arising from that report including— ( a ) an order of its own motion for the winding up of a body corporate, or ( b ) an order for the purpose of remedying any disability suffered by any person whose interests were adversely affected by the conduct of the affairs of the company, provided that, in making any such order, the court shall have regard to the interests of any other person who may be adversely affected by the order. (2) If, in the case of any body corporate liable to be wound up under the Companies Acts, it appears to the Director from— ( a ) any report made under section 11 as a result of an application by the Director under section 8, or ( b ) any report made by inspectors appointed by the Director under this Act, or ( c ) any information or document obtained by the Director under this Part, that a petition should be presented for the winding up of the body, the Director may, unless the body is already being wound up by the court, present a petition for it to be so wound up if the court thinks it just and equitable for it to be so wound up. 13.—(1) The expenses of and incidental to an investigation by an inspector appointed by the court under the foregoing provisions of this Act shall be defrayed in the first instance by the relevant Minister but the court may direct that any person being— ( a ) a body corporate dealt with in the report, or ( b ) the applicant or applicants for the investigation, shall be liable, to such extent as the court may direct, to repay the relevant Minister, provided that no such liability on the part of the applicant or applicants shall exceed in the aggregate £100,000. (2) Without prejudice to subsection (1), any person who is— ( a ) convicted on indictment of an offence on a prosecution instituted as a result of an investigation, ( b ) ordered to pay damages or restore any property in proceedings brought as a result of an investigation, or ( c ) awarded damages or to whom property is restored in proceedings brought as a result of an investigation, may, in the same proceedings, be ordered to repay all or part of the expenses referred to in subsection (1) to the relevant Minister or to any person on whom liability has been imposed by the court under that subsection, provided that, in the case of a person to whom paragraph (c) relates, the court shall not order payment in excess of one-tenth of the amount of the damages awarded or of the value of the property restored, as the case may be, and any such order shall not be executed until the person concerned has received his damages or the property has been restored, as the case may be. (3) The report of an inspector may, if he thinks fit, and shall, if the court so directs, include a recommendation as to the directions (if any) which he thinks appropriate, in the light of his investigation, to be given under subsection (1). (3A) In this section ‘relevant Minister’ means(a) in case the inspector or inspectors concerned was or were appointed under section 7, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and (b) in case the inspector or inspectors concerned was or were appointed under section 8, the Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment.