Frozen €6m 'IRA account' handed over to State
The High Court has today directed that just a bank account containing just under €6m, believed to be the proceeds of the IRA, that has been frozen for more than 20 years be handed over to the State.
In February 1985, an account containing more than IR£1.75m at a bank in Navan, Co Meath was frozen under the Offences Against the State Act on the grounds that the then Garrett Fitzgerald-led FG/Labour coalition Government believed the money was the property of an unlawful organisation.
Several months afterward, the money was frozen. Two individuals Alan Clancy and Dave McCartney, both of whom the High Court was told are deceased, with addresses in the United States and Mexico, brought court proceedings aimed at securing the seized money.
In a judgment delivered by Mr Justice Barrington in 1988, the High Court dismissed their claim.
That ruling was appealed to the Supreme Court. However the matter was never progressed and the money remained frozen by the Court for the last 20 years.
Today the High Court was told that all claims for the money, which due to the interest accumulated over since the mid-80s now amounts to €5.9m, have been dropped.
Shane Murphy SC, appearing with, Paul Anthony McDermott BL, for the State told the court that the estate of the late Mr Clancy, who also had an address in Co Louth as well as the US, were making no claim for the cash held in the frozen account.
No claim had been made by the estate of the late Mr McCartney.
Counsel also formally applied to the court to have the men's action dismissed on the grounds that after 20 years there was an "inordinate and inexcusable delay" in bringing the claim.
Mr Justice Kevin Feeney said that he was satisfied to make an order directing that the money be paid to the Minister for Justice "for the benefit of central funds".
The Judge also dismissed the claims to the money.
Mr Justice Feeney said that it would be an "undeniable injustice to allow a case of this vintage to proceed," in the light of an inexcusable and inordinate delay in bringing the claim.
The Judge further added that was "an absence of any explanation" as to why there was such a delay.




