I'm not so convinced that the action is contrary to Nama's best interest; the Barclay brothers' MO has always
been to buy assets on the cheap from distressed investors; IMHO they tried to shaft McKillen with "Fat Arse" going along with this;
Comparing McKillen to Sean Quinn is not accurate or fair
Mr Marshall told the court that “significant payment was made from the Barclay brothers’ organisation” to the wife of Derek Quinlan, an Irish financier who was a shareholder and founder in Coroin along with Mr McKillen.
Mr Marshall alleged that from January 2011 Mr Quinlan was “joined at the hip” and did nothing contrary to the wishes of the Barclays.
Mr Marshall also invited Mr Justice Richards to draw “adverse inferences” from the fact neither of the Barclay brothers would be attending court.
The High Court was told that Mr McKillen, who owns 36.2 per cent of Coroin, and other Irish investors including Mr Quinlan, set up the company to buy the trophy hotels in 2004, “riding a wave of cheap and easy Irish debt” provided by Irish banks.
By 2009, a number of the shareholders had exited and “things were not looking so rosy” after the banks which funded the deal had “gone bust or been nationalised”.
In January last year the Barclays gained a foothold by buying one of the shareholders, Misland, for £70m. Mr Quinlan’s debts were then taken into Nama, Ireland’s “bad bank”. The Barclays seized the opportunity to do a deal with Nama to buy Mr Quinlan’s debts, giving them effective control of his stake in Maybourne Group, which is a subsidiary of Coroin.
Mr McKillen’s High Court action alleges the Barclay brothers infringed his “pre-emption rights” to have first refusal on the stakes of any other investors in the hotels that came up for sale. The Barclays and their companies deny the allegations.
Of course they should be trying to recover maximum amount of loans ASAP, but at the expense of those actually servicing their loans?