Judge queries examinership costs

A High Court judge has said the number of experts being called to give evidence in examinership cases is increasing costs and his own blood pressure.

Mr Justice Peter Charleton said that, while not having the powers now, he hoped in the future to be able to limit expert evidence as he was entitled to take costs into account and was not going to “sit in court listening to multiple experts ... I’ve had too much of that in the past”.

He made the remarks yesterday when dealing with matters relating to the examinership of a chicken processing company in Co Waterford employing more than 130 people.

Court protection was granted last August to Cappoquin Poultry Ltd (CPL) and a related company Cappoquin Poultry Holdings Ltd after the court heard the business had debts of €6m. Michael McAteer of Grant Thornton was later confirmed as examiner. The costs of the examinership, including legal fees, are estimated about €200,000.

CPL’s largest unsecured creditor, Henry Good Ltd, owed €3.9m for supplying feed, had petitioned for Mr McAteer’s appointment on grounds including CPL was insolvent and to prevent assets being stripped.

Yesterday, Rossa Fanning BL, for the examiner, sought an adjournment of a hearing aimed at securing court approval for a survival scheme allowing the companies exit examinership. Revenue and most classes of creditors back the scheme.

Mr Fanning said the examiner needed time to respond to an affidavit for the directors seriously disputing valuations placed by the examiner’s valuers on assets and equipment. The valuation dispute could only be resolved by examination of the four valuers involved and he expected the scheme hearing to take two days.

The judge asked why it was necessary to have two valuers on each side and why it was considered that more experts would be more convincing. “It puts my blood pressure up.”

Mr Fanning said his side had to call two valuers as one was concerned with property and the second with equipment. The valuation dispute was important as the companies’ directors argued they would do better if the company was placed in liquidation, a view based on their insistence the assets had a higher value than the examiner’s experts had put on them, he said.

Mr Justice Charleton suggested the valuers could get together with one giving evidence for each side and adjourned the matter to next week, saying he would deal with in a single day.