Solicitor contacted wife from unknown location

MISSING solicitor Michael Lynn has been in phone contact with his wife Bríd Murphy in recent days but she does not know his whereabouts, a High Court judge was told yesterday.

While Ms Muprhy has initiated proceedings against her husband and ACC Bank for a 50% share of the proceeds of sale of a house in Howth, there are no marital difficulties between the couple, said Gary McCarthy, for Ms Muprhy.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly yesterday admitted proceedings by Ms Muprhy against Mr Lynn and ACC Bank to the list of the Commerical Court. In her action, Ms Muprhy is seeking 50% ownership of the proceeds of sale of Glenlion House, Howth, Co Dublin, which the couple had intended as their family home but which is the subject of competing claims by Ms Murphy and several banks and other financial institutions.

Mr Justice Kelly observed that, at some point, there would have to be a single hearing in which the various claims regarding Glenlion will have to be thrashed out to determine which has priority. He did not believe there would be “anything simple” about establishing priority claims in this case.

The judge noted that ACC has a registered charge for some €3.85 million, while there were other claims of €6.8m from AIB, €5.1m by First Active, €6.4m from Ulster Bank, €5.8m, plus a separate €500,000 from Bank of Scotland (Ireland), and additional claims from other financial institutions. Ms Murphy was claiming her claim was superior.

He granted an application by John McBratney SC, for ACC, to appoint Rory O’Farrell as receiver over Glenlion.

Mr McCarthy, for Ms Muprhy, said his client had her own case regarding Glenlion. He said Ms

Murphy does not know where her husband is and he had not returned to Ireland.

She had been in phone contact with him since Wednesday last when he failed to attend for cross-examination by the Law Society but did not know where Mr Lynn was phoning from.

Mr McCarthy said some €7m was being sought from his client relating to loans for Glenlion and she was claiming to be joint legal owner of the property.