Magnier lawyers claim construction magnate funding owners' defence on alleged reneged estate sale
Irish businessman John Magnier arriving at the High Court, Dublin, where it was claimed that recently discovered documents were evidence of Maurice Regan 'bullying and threatening' custodians of the Co Tipperary estate. Picture Collins Courts
Lawyers acting for John Magnier have claimed that Maurice Regan, the US-based construction magnate, is funding the owners of the Barne Estate in their defence of a High Court action taken by the Coolmore Stud billionaire.
Mr Magnier’s proceedings are anchored in the claim that the owners of the Barne Estate reneged on a purported deal to sell the 751-acre estate to him for €15m, instead choosing to sell to Mr Regan for a higher price.
Senior counsel Paul Gallagher, representing Mr Magnier, also claimed on Friday that recently discovered documents were evidence of Mr Regan “bullying and threatening” custodians of the Co Tipperary estate, and inducing a breach of an exclusivity agreement that, the plaintiffs say, was in effect following the purported deal. All the claims were denied.
Senior counsel Martin Hayden, for the defendants, said the allegation that Mr Regan was financing the proceedings was “an outrage”, and there was no evidence before the court to support such a claim.
A hearing into the dispute between Mr Magnier and the owners of the Barne Estate was due to begin on Thursday. However, Mr Justice Michael Quinn on Friday adjourned the case for several weeks, allowing the defendants to remedy what he described as their “incomplete and grossly inadequate” discovery of documents.
Mr Magnier — along with his adult children John Paul Magnier and Kate Wachman — wants to enforce the alleged deal worth €15m. They say the deal was struck at an August 22, 2023, meeting at Mr Magnier’s Coolmore Stud.
They also claim an exclusivity agreement — stipulating that the estate would not permit its representatives to solicit or encourage any expression of interest, inquiry, or offer on the property from anyone other than Mr Magnier — was in effect from August 31 to September 30.
Barne Estate is held for the benefit of Richard Thomson-Moore, his sister Alexandra, their children, and their spouses by a Jersey trust.
The Magniers have sued the Barne Estate, Mr Thomson-Moore, and three companies of IQEQ (Jersey) Ltd seeking to enforce the purported deal.
The Barne defendants say there was never any such agreement and, subsequently, they agreed to sell it for €22.5mto construction magnate Mr Regan, founder of the New York building firm JT Magen. Mr Regan is not a party to the case.
Paul Gallagher SC, for Mr Magnier, on Friday claimed that the defendants refused to provide information on foot of queries about Mr Regan — whom Mr Gallagher described as a “dark force” — allegedly funding the proceedings.
“We have repeatedly asked for the confirmation that Mr Regan is funding these proceedings,” Mr Gallagher said.
Martin Hayden SC, for the defendants, said he was not obliged to engage with Mr Gallagher’s allegations.
He said that, if Mr Gallagher had the “remotest idea” a non-party was funding the litigation, he was “absolutely sure, with the resources at his disposal, we’d have a motion to strike out [the proceedings]”.
Mr Gallagher also claimed that a document of 60-odd pages of typed notes written by John Stokes — a Tipperary-based estate agent who was present at the August 2023 meeting at Coolmore Stud — not only set out the terms of the deal for the estate as Mr Magnier has pleaded, but also showed Mr Regan inducing a breach of the exclusivity agreement.
He further claimed that this “rolling note” — previously the subject of an incorrect claim of privilege by the defendant — had evidence of Mr Regan “bullying and threatening” Mr Stokes, along with threatening of other Barne Estate trustees.
In response, Mr Hayden said that if Mr Magnier felt he had a case against Mr Regan relating to a breach of an exclusivity agreement, “given the level of resources and representation he has, he would have sued Mr Regan”.
“Instead, we get this allegation made for public consumption,” Mr Hayden said. Mr Hayden said that it was not the case that Mr Stokes was bullied.
He said the court would see “in due course” that Mr Regan made several offers – €16.5m, €18m, and then €20m — for the Barne Estate but received no engagement in response.
“If that’s bullying, I’d like to be bullied like that,” Mr Hayden said.
After two days of oral argument, Mr Justice Quinn made orders for further discovery, directing the defendants to search devices belonging to key custodians for documents captured by previously agreed categories of discovery.
This order in part arose from the defendant’s admission an email inbox linked to Mr Thomson-Moore was not searched during the discovery process.
He also ordered that the defendants carry out a review of their previous claims of privilege made over documents in the case. This order arose from the incorrect claim of privilege over Mr Stokes’ “rolling diary”.
The judge ruled with the defendants in determining they were correct in their interpretation of agreed upon discovery categories relating requests for “communications”. The defendants, the court has heard, limited their discovery in these categories to phone messages and emails.
The case was adjourned to a date in April, when a new date for trial will be set.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
