Seven companies owned by property developer Liam Carroll explained in the High Court today the arguments why their application for court protection should proceed.
The seven companies have already had their application for court protection rejected by both the High and Supreme Courts.
But after allowing them lodge an unusual fresh application for examinership last Friday night, the High Court today heard the companies arguments as to why that application should be allowed proceed.
Senior counsel Michael Cush told the court how the Supreme Court's two main criticisms of the last application have been remedied in this new one.
One of those criticisms was the failure to include the business plan and property asset valuations upon which the companies survival proposals are based.
The decision to exclude them, Mr Cush said, had been taken by Mr Carroll as leading shareholder of the group, against the advice of his lawyers and fellow directors.
Mr Carroll was hospitalised last week, and is still not in a position to give legal instructions, and Mr Cush said that at the time he made the decision, Mr Carroll was operating under stress and his decision making capacity was impaired.
The decision to submit them as part of this fresh application, the court was told, was taken by his fellow directors.
Mr Cush also addressed the other Supreme Court criticism, by outlining details of the ongoing financial support for the companies from some of their banks - details which were absent in the last application.
Asked by Mr Justice Cooke why this information had been left out previously, Mr Cush said that only the banks could answer why they were unwilling to provide written support.
The hearing continues tomorrow.
