Alan Hynes U-turns on evidence in fraudulent trading hearing

Businessman Alan Hynes has told the High Court he is now contesting an application to disqualify him as a company director over his involvement in three connected liquidated companies.

David Whelan, for liquidator Myles Kirby, described the move as a “complete volte-face” of the businessman’s earlier position – when he said he would accept whatever disqualification the court wanted to impose. Mr Hynes said the statements had been made “under some pressure and I felt in a very uncomfortable situation”.

Under cross-examination on Thursday, he also told counsel he was no longer conceding that he had acted as a shadow or de facto director of the companies when he had either been disqualified or restricted from doing so.

Mr Kirby is seeking orders in relation to Mr Hynes and others over what the liquidator said were multiple company law breaches, including fraudulent and reckless trading with the intention of defeating creditors of three companies.

The companies liquidated by Mr Kirby in 2020 are all connected with a jewellery firm which had been long established in Main Street, Wexford, until it lost that premises in 2016 over rent arrears.

They are Hynes Jewellery Wexford Ltd; JW Fashions Ltd, which was started up after the original Main Street shop was repossessed; and Tuskar Property Holdings.

Alan Hynes was a director of Tuskar Property until 2009 when it became wholly owned by his Cambridge-based brother-in-law, medical doctor Adrian O’Reilly.

Alan’s cousin Frank Hynes was a director of Hynes Jewellers and continued running the business when JW Fashions was set up. Frank’s wife Martina, the bookkeeper for Hynes Jewellers, jointly owned a bank account with her husband which the liquidator said was used to hide money due to creditors of the business.

The three Hyneses, along with Dr O'Reilly and a company called Tuskar Investment Group, which was also 100 per cent owned by Dr O'Reilly, were all respondents in the case. They all denied wrongdoing although only the three Hyneses participated in the hearing, all via video link.

Under cross-examination, Alan Hynes told Mr Whelan he was contesting almost all the liquidator’s claims against him, including the personal liability application, fraudulent trading, failure to maintain proper books and records and acting as a shadow director.

He said, however, that signing blank cheques to be filled in by others – which he admitted doing earlier in the hearing – was “very problematic”.

He told Mr Whelan he was now contesting most matters because earlier statements he made were done “under some pressure”.

Employment contract

Asked if he agreed he had fabricated an employment contract with Tuskar Property, seeking €1 million from the liquidation of that company, he said that was not correct. He denied another “deed of retirement” document was also fabricated or created with a view to mislead.

Counsel put it to him that a statement of affairs he prepared in 2020, claiming Hynes Jewellers was entitled to €1.25 million in “bills receivable” was “incredible given that company had not traded since 2016”.

Mr Hynes said the explanation for the figures in that statement was that they were based on conversations he had with the directors of Hynes Jewellers. He did not have any documentation to go on but there “was a rationale” behind the figures, he said.

He did not accept he prepared such documents to suit his own ends and create a false picture in relation to the companies.

In relation to a €1 million property investment given to him for investment via his Tuskar Asset Management firm, he denied that money was used fraudulently to pay for Tuskar Property debts and to fund personal expenses including groceries, restaurants, flights and hotels.

He did not accept that a €164,000 transfer from Tuskar Property to the personal joint account of Frank and Martina Hynes, and the repayment back to Tuskar Property of €150,000, was done to conceal money from creditors.

He did not accept that he was in control of all three companies. He had not acted in breach of a previous disqualification/restriction order and said he was “upstanding in everything I have done”.

Mr Whelan, seeking various orders, said the evidence was clear that Alan and Frank were involved in fraudulent and reckless trading and that Adrian O’Reilly was at the very least careless in his supervision of the companies he was involved in.

Mr Whelan said Martina Hynes had failed to meaningfully engage with the liquidator and only when she came to give evidence did she say she was the bookkeeper of Hynes Jewellers.

Mr Justice Michael Quinn reserved his decision.