The protracted legal proceedings between Master Meats Packers (MMP) founder, Mr Paschal Phelan, and beef baron Mr Larry Goodman, are due to Mr Phelan's view he should have got more money for his shareholding simply because Mr Goodman is rich, the High Court has been told.
Mr Goodman came to the High Court yesterday to hear Mr Dermot Gleeson SC begin his address on behalf of the beef baron in the continuing legal actions between Mr Phelan and Mr Goodman. It was the 25th day of the action.
The previous days have been taken up with the opening of the case on behalf of Mr Phelan.
Mr Phelan claims Mr Goodman conspired to force him out of the beef processing industry by secretly controlling a 50 per cent stake in MMP. He is suing Mr Goodman for £30 million (€38.1 million) damages and interest, and claims that without his knowledge he had been "sold out" by his co-director, Jordanian businessman Mr Zakariah El Taher, to Mr Goodman.
He alleges there was a conspiracy between Mr Taher, Mr Goodman and others in April 1987 to secure the removal of MMP from the meat trade.
For the purposes of the court proceedings, Mr Goodman accepts he owned and controlled MMP since 1987.
Mr Goodman and Mr Taher deny allegations of wrongdoing. Mr Taher alleges Mr Goodman acted to defraud and damage Mr Phelan with a view to eliminating Mr Phelan and MMP as competition to Goodman International or with a view to establishing a monopoly in the Irish beef industry.
An earlier court hearing was told Mr Taher's shares in MMP were held by a Liechtenstein entity, Master Meats Anstalt (MMA), and it was alleged that they were sold to another Liechtenstein entity, Taras Ansalt, belonging to Mr Goodman.
Outlining Mr Goodman's case yesterday, Mr Gleeson said his client denied there had been a breach of contract, inducement of breach of contract or a conspiracy against Mr Phelan. The case involved a sale of shares that took place in September 1988 and harked back to transactions in 1986/87. At the heart of the case was Mr Phelan's plea - "give me more money for my shares".
There was no cause of action to look for more money simply because "the man [Mr Goodman] is rich".
If a person found he had not sold his horse at a fair to a local farmer but to international financier George Soros, would the person have a right to go back and say: "I want more money" because he had not known the buyer's identity"? counsel asked.
According to Mr Phelan's lawyers, the height of Mr Phelan's ambition was to become a senior manager in the Goodman organisation where he worked for a while. He had fallen out with Mr Goodman, said he was unhappy and went off on his own at the age of 28 into the beef industry with no capital. Five years later he emerged with £6 million. Twelve years later there was now this extraordinary claim in which Mr Phelan was saying: "That was not enough at all. I did not know who was buying the company. The company is worth a lot more and I want extra money now".
The number one building block of Mr Phelan's claim would seem to be the contention the share sale in 1987 constituted a breach of a side agreement in which Mr Phelan and Mr Taher agreed not to sell "his shares" in MMP without offering the shares to the other party first. The obligation was to "offer" the shares not to "sell". Those shares in MMP were never sold and never transferred by anybody, Mr Gleeson said. The shares sold were in MMA. The sale of the shares that took place in 1987 was a transaction not captured by the side agreement.
This case was presenting Mr Phelan as some sort of commercial innocent who was in some way "gulled" in this matter. That image was undermined by documentary evidence.
It had been suggested there had been cumulative profits of £5 million during Mr Phelan's period in the company but it appeared the company lost £5 million.
The image presented had been false and bogus to the tune of £10 million, counsel said. Far from being profitable, the company had descended speedily into a ruinous financial state from which Mr Phelan had walked away with something like £6 million.
