Pennys settles legal action against Superquinn

A legal action brought by Penneys aimed at having Superquinn vacate a premises in Naas which the clothing retailers plans to redevelop has been resolved, the High Court heard this morning.

On Wednesday Primark, which trades as Penneys in Ireland, was granted permission by the High Court to bring proceedings against the supermarket operators due to their alleged failure to vacate the premises where Superquinn have operated a store by the end of last month.

The court had granted Primark short service, on an ex parte basis, to bring motions seeking to have Superquinn vacate the premises immediately arising out of Primark's claim that alleged failure to leave had "hindered plans" it has to redevelop the site in the Co Kildare town.

However this morning Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy agreed to strike out the case after being informed by counsel for Penney's Michael Cush SC, appearing with Padraig Lyons Bl, that the matter between the parties had been resolved on terms.

Aidan Redmond SC for Superquinn said that his clients were consenting to the matter being struck out. No details of the terms of settlement were revealed in open court. The hearing had been expected to last for an hour.

Last Wednesday at the High Court Mr Justice John Edwards had given Primark permission to bring an action against Superquinn arising out of the alleged failure to vacate the premises.

The court heard that Primark purchased the premises at Naas Shopping centre, which was occupied by Superquinn, from its previous owners in 2008. In addition Primark claimed it also obtained and executed a deed of surrender in August of that year, which required Superquinn to vacate the premises by the end of December 2010.

However Primark's lawyers said that the supermarket had not left the premises, despite "the clear and unambiguous terms" of the deed of surrender. Primark argued it was "concerned" because the alleged failure to vacate was holding up its' redevelopment plans.

Primark told the court that it needed to carry out an asbestos audit and soil survey on the site as soon as possible but were unable as the supermarket continued to be in occupation of the site.

The court also heard that solicitors acting for Superquinn wrote to Primark saying that they would not be in a position to leave the Naas premises until the end of February, but were prepared to pay Primark damages for trespass.

However Primark informed the court that such a proposal was not acceptable to them.