Resolution found in estranged couple’s High Court action over Temple Bar hotel partnership

High Court proceedings brought by a woman against parties including her estranged husband in an attempt to have a receiver appointed over a partnership that owns a hotel in Dublin’s Temple Bar have been settled.

The action was brought by Sheelagh Conway who sued experienced businessman and her estranged husband Frank Conway and John Harty who, along with the plaintiff, are involved with the Peig Sayers Hotel Partnership.

Mr Harty was an alleged trustee of the partnership, which allegedly owns the 29-bedroom Riverhouse Hotel complex, which also has a bar and a nightclub, at Eustace Street in Dublin 2.

She claimed the partnership was not run correctly and that Mr Conway, from whom she has been separated for 20 years, had not acted in good faith or in an honest manner towards her.

Two well-known Italian wines to savour, both at reduced prices

---

‘Jesus Christ, the doors are locked’: The full story of the Stardust fire, with new testimony

---

Wake-up call on Newstalk Breakfast as inflammatory language on immigration goes mainstream

---

Family affairs: How Ireland’s newly rich are putting money to work in secretive firms

---

She sought to have the partnership formally wound up and its assets sold.

The claims were denied by Mr Conway.

Mr Healy was not represented and took no part in the proceedings.

The case was listed before Mr Justice Conor Dignam on Thursday. However, following out-of-court discussions between the parties all matters were resolved and the proceedings could be struck out, the judge was told by Gary McCarthy SC, instructed by solicitor Tom Casey, for Ms Conway.

Andrew Walker SC, for Mr Conway, said his side was consenting to that course of action.

No details of the settlement, which is understood to be confidential, were revealed in open court.

Mr Justice Dignam welcomed the settlement and agreed to strike out the proceedings, with liberty to both sides to seek to re-enter the action.

In her action, Ms Conway sought various orders and declarations including an order winding up the partnership and an order for the sale of the partnership’s assets, which would be conducted by a receiver she sought to have appointed to take control of the property.

She further sought a declaration from the court that the partnership has been formally dissolved on the grounds that it is just and equitable.

Mr Conway denied any wrongdoing, and his legal team argued the orders and declarations sought by Ms Conway should not be granted.