The legal hearing between the Anglo Irish Bank and the businessman, Sean Quinn and his family has created a new twist when the Quinns finally agreed on the extension of the interim injunction which was previously ordered by the court. This interim injunction prevents them from moving or transferring their international assets.
The Anglo Irish Bank has secured injunction that prevents the Quinns from handling their international assets. The injunction given was temporary at first. The bank pushed through with their request for an extension of this injunction; however, they were opposed by the Quinns until recently when the family has acceded. The Quinns finally agreed to extend the injunction.
This court order will run until September 9, being the earliest date. During the period covered, the Quinns are not allowed to interfere with their international assets. This order can be lifted depending on the decision of the judge. The Quinns argument is that the Irish courts holds no jurisdiction over disputes involving foreign companies as clearly, these companies are not under Irish law but under foreign law. If the judge rules in favour of this argument, the injunction will be lifted. However, if the judge has ruled that this dispute is still under Irish jurisdiction, then the injunction will be in place until the complete hearing of the case. The case is deemed to be heard in full by November or December this year.
The Anglo Irish Bank was very happy with the ruling of the court. On the other hand, the Quinns remained mum about the issue. According the family’s spokesperson, the Quinns don’t want to comment yet about this issue. They chose to just keep silent at the moment.
The decision of the Quinns to accede came when the Anglo Irish Bank has recently been openly pushing the court to allow the affidavit of Mr. Richard Woodhouse that exposes the Quinns’ alleged breach of the injunction. This request has not been granted and the bank was advised by the court to pursue the Quinns on this allegation if they really believe that there was a breach of the injunction.
The Quinns were also been noted to request some changes on the original injunction that was first ruled out the by the court prior to the recent extension. These requests were also turned down by the court.
