Cork charity helping Ukrainian refugees secures injunction against its former CEO

Together-Razem Centre in Cork has been granted a temporary High Court injunction against its former chief executive, Wojciech Bialek. File picture: Jim Coughlan

A charity that has been helping Ukrainian refugees in Ireland has secured a temporary High Court injunction against its former chief executive who is alleged to have unlawfully seized control of its offices.

The injunction was made in favour of Together-Razem Centre Company Ltd by Guarantee against Wojciech Bialek, who is alleged to have resigned earlier this year.

The Cork-based charity is funded by the HSE and for many years has provided support services to immigrants living in Ireland.

It claims that Mr Bialek stood down from the role he has held since 2012 after an independent accountant — appointed by the charity’s board of directors to review historical transactions and accounting practices — sought clarification on certain matters from the defendant.

It is claimed that he resigned after he was asked to respond to questions raised by the accountant about certain transactions.

The charity claims that last month the defendant and others claiming to be members of plaintiff called an extraordinary general meeting of the charity.

It is claimed that the notice for this meeting — where it was proposed to remove existing directors and replace them with new directors — was invalid and not in compliance with company law.

However, it is claimed that the defendant and others went ahead with the meeting and purportedly passed a resolution removing the existing directors and the company secretary, and replaced them with alternatives.

It is alleged that, after that meeting on July 11, the defendant started to identify himself in correspondence as being the charity’s chairperson.

On July 12 it is claimed the defendant attended at the charity’s premises at Kilnap Business Park, Old Mallow Rd, Blackpool, in Cork City, and effectively seized control of the offices by changing the locks.

The defendant and others remain in control of the offices, which contain the charity’s books, records, and computers systems.

The charity said that, in light of the fact that the defendant was — prior to his resignation — being examined in respect of certain financial transactions and governance issues, it has a real concern that Mr Bialek may remove, alter, or erase data and records held by it.

The defendant and the others have no lawful entitlement to remove the board, convene an EGM, appoint new directors, reinstate himself to his former position, or remain in possession of the charity’s property, it is claimed.

The charity claims that the gardaí were called but that they have indicated that the dispute is a matter for the civil courts.

The injunction application came before Mr Justice Brian O’Moore on Friday evening. After considering the application, the judge granted the plaintiff a temporary ex-parte injunction against the defendant.

The judge remarked that recent events at the charity appear to have been “chaotic”. 

The injunction restrains the defendant, or any other persons who are aware of the order from removing, deleting or copying any of the plaintiff’s documents held at its premises.

It also restrains the defendant and others from transferring or withdrawing any funds or monies held by the plaintiff or trespassing, entering or attending at the plaintiff’s property.

The defendant is further restrained by the injunction from representing himself to any other party as being an employee, trustee, or chairperson of the plaintiff.

The order remains in place until Monday when the matter will return before the court.

Seeking the order, Eoin Clifford SC for the plaintiff said that the HSE has been informed about the matter and the charity’s bank account, which contains a six-figure sum has been frozen.

Counsel said that the reason cited for seeking the EGM to remove the board, was that the existing board had put the plaintiff at risk in accepting the defendant’s resignation as CEO without discussing the matter with him.

It was also alleged that the existing board had been negligent by allegedly failing to furnish a proper contract to the defendant prior to his resignation.

These were at best strange and unusual reasons for calling an EGM, counsel said.

The Charities Regulator has also been informed of the situation, counsel added, which has informed his client that it should take legal action to safeguard the charity’s assets and records.