Developer Johnny Ronan’s dispute with US firm Fortress Investment Group which he claims owes him €3.3 million from an insurance award relating to their joint Fibonacci Square office development in Ballsbridge, Dublin, has been admitted to the fast-track Commercial Court.
Mr Ronan is suing Isle of Man-registered Aquela Ltd. The defendant says his claim is groundless.
The case was admitted to the Commercial Court on Monday by Mr Justice Denis McDonald on the application of barrister for Mr Ronan, Alison Keirse.
Lyndon MacCann SC, for Aquela, said his client was not objecting to entry to the commercial list, but he said his side argues it is a groundless claim as a matter of contractual interpretation.
I went to the cinema to see Small Things Like These. By the time I emerged I had concluded the film was crap
Forêt restaurant review: A masterclass in French classic cooking in Dublin 4
‘I’m hoping at least one girl who is on the fence about reporting her violent boyfriend ... will read about my case’
What Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the Greens promised in 2020 - and how much they delivered
The dispute arises out of a deal in which Ronan Group Real Estate swapped its stake in Fibonacci Square – which is leased to Meta – for the Fortress interest in Waterfront South Central on Dublin’s quays. As part of that deal, Mr Ronan said in an affidavit, Aquela was obliged to pay him 75 per cent of the amount received from a business interruption insurance claim arising from delays to the development due to the pandemic. He said demands were made for payment.
Solicitors for the defendant rejected the claim, asserting that no payment was due to him arising from service by Aquela of a “notice of warranty” claim.
Mr Ronan said the basis on which Aquela contends no payment is due was “manifestly erroneous” and a clear misreading of the relevant clause.
Mr Justice McDonald adjourned the matter to next month.
In separate proceedings currently pending before the Commercial Court, a number of Ronan Group-related companies are suing Fortress and related firms claiming the defendants failed to engage with the Ronan firms’ effort to refinance facilities under a development assets facility agreement and a mezzanine facility agreement.
This, it is alleged, means the defendants have breached an obligation not to clog, stymie, or otherwise hinder redemption rights under those agreements.
The Ronan companies are seeking damages for breach of contract, unlawful interference with contractual relations and/or inducing breach of contract and/or negligence and/or breach of duty.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
