Declan Ganley, the chief executive of Rivada Networks, has told a court in the US that he is making “good faith efforts” to sell several Irish properties to pay down a $20 million [€18.5 million] default debt judgment and that a threat of “incarceration ... is not justified under law”.
Ganley, through his lawyers, was responding to a ruling by Judge Jennifer Schecter of the New York supreme court, who earlier this month found Ganley in contempt of court and hit him with an escalating scale of penalties if he didn’t complete the court-ordered sale of several Galway properties.
She warned in that ruling that punishment for contempt of court including “a fine, or imprisonment, or both according to law”.
It is the latest in an ongoing dispute between Ganley and one of the shareholders in Rivada, David Shuman, to whom he owes about $20 million arising out of a default debt judgment.
Ganley has at various times been ordered by the court to turn over control of a number of companies, sell several properties and vehicles, and to make monthly payments of $20,000 to Mr Shuman until the debt is fulfilled.
Last month, Shuman returned to court to note that the sale of the land had been delayed and that he was seeking a contempt of court ruling.
In the past week, Ganley’s lawyers have, in legal filings, told the court that the sale of the properties, which includes farm land in Galway and a derelict pub near Ganley’s house, “has not yet closed due to circumstances that are outside of Mr Ganley’s control” and that his making “good faith” efforts to progress the deal.
The filings state that Ganley had “found a purchaser for the property, [but] the purchaser has not yet agreed to finalise the sale – and thus Mr Ganley is not yet able to transfer the sale proceeds”.
The papers explain that Ganley had “been navigating the protracted process for buying real property in Ireland” and that he had offered to put Shuman “in contact with the auctioneer so that [Shuman] can request any additional information [he] requires”. According to the papers Shuman “has not taken up Mr Ganley on that offer”.
In relation to the threat of imprisonment, Ganley’s lawyers said that this was “not justified under the law” because he had not failed to disclose assets and had “progressed the sale and offered to provide additional information on the process”.
He claimed Shuman “has not suffered an actual loss” due to the delay and that a sanction was not “warranted to induce compliance”, as he had been complying already.
Ganley’s lawyers said that the court “should reconsider its prior decision and order”, which found him in contempt and imposed the higher scale of fines.
Shuman, who is pursuing the debt through a company called Astraea, responded by stating there was “no evidence offered in support” of Ganley’s contention that he had made good faith efforts to comply with the order.
He also disagreed with Ganley’s claim that he had suffered no actual loss, arguing that he had “suffered significant actual damages from [Ganley’s] continuing noncompliance, including the lost time/value of money, lost opportunities, interest and additional attorney’s fees”.
When contacted by The Irish Times, Mr Ganley said: “Despite the injustice of having a default judgment enforced against me in a case in which I was never served, the case was never heard on its merits, and the debt has already been paid off, I continue to make every effort to comply with the judge’s rulings in this matter. Justice will be done eventually.”
- Sign up for the Business Today newsletter and get the latest business news and commentary in your inbox every weekday morning
- Opt in to Business push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our Inside Business podcast is published weekly – Find the latest episode here
