A Dublin-based Chinese businesswoman has launched High Court proceedings over serious concerns she has about an Irish company in which she invested over €1 million.
Li Sun has brought the action against Clonmannon House Retirement Village Limited, with a registered address at the Mall, Main Street, Lucan in Dublin.
Ms Sun claims that in 2019 she invested €1 million in the firm, which was to use the money to purchase and develop a property known as Clonmannon House in Ashford, Co Wicklow, through the Enterprise Investment Track of the Irish Immigrant Investor Programme
Ms Sun claims she hoped her investment would result in her securing an Irish visa.
In a sworn statement to the High Court, Ms Sun said she has serious concerns about her investment and fears she will not get the €1.3 million she says she is entitled to from the company under the terms of the agreement she has with the defendant,
While it is unclear if any assets the company holds will be sold she fears the company may dissipate assets or sell shares to avoid paying her what she alleges she is owed.
The court heard that in correspondence solicitors acting for the defendant have denied any wrongdoing and that Ms Sun has no reason for complaint.
Ms Sun claims that following an introduction to Candace Lafleur, who the plaintiff had understood to be the defendant’s sole shareholder, she entered into an arrangement where she expected to get her money back, plus interest of 10 per cent annually after five years.
However, she claims she has only received €100,000 from the defendant, and has not been provided with the company’s quarterly management accounts or been allowed to inspect the books and records.
Ms Sun claims she is alarmed by the defendant’s alleged refusal to provide her with all the material and financial information she says she is entitled to.
On Tuesday Ms Sun, represented by Sean O’Sullivan BL, instructed by Rafferty Jamesons Solicitors, secured a temporary High Court injunction restraining the defendant from disbursing, dissipating, or in any way disposing of any money received by it concerning any sale or disposal of the defendant’s assets or shares.
The injunction was granted on an ex parte basis by Mr Justice Mark Sanfey.
In granting the order, the judge said the courts should be cautious about granting freezing orders, especially after only hearing from one side.
However, after considering the material put before the court in this case the court the judge said he was satisfied to grant the temporary order sought.
The judge made the matter returnable to a date later this week.
As well as the injunction Ms Sun, of Sear Court, Clontarf, Dublin 3, seeks various orders from the court against the defendant, including judgment of €1.3 million and damages for breach of contract.
She also seeks orders directing the defendant to provide her with its quarterly accounts, to that she be allowed to inspect the defendant’s books and records.
She further seeks orders freezing the defendant’s assets below a certain level pending the determination of the proceedings.
Ms Sun claims she was one of three investors, who each invested €1 million in the firm, but says that she does not know the terms of their investment agreements.
She also accepts that when she agreed with the company she did not get independent legal advice before entering into the investment, as she trusted Ms Lafleur.
She claims that while she has been given some information from the company, she has not been given all the relevant documentation that she says she is entitled to get under the terms of her investment agreement.
She has not been given a full set of the defendant’s accounts, and from the information she has been provided with says she has serious concerns about payments made by the company.
She claims that payments of €750,000 made to a company called Castlerook Ltd, which it is alleged is the sole shareholder of the defendant, have been made without any explanation.
She claims the defendant has claimed the money were paid by it to an architect, builders and surveyors.
Other six-figure payments that have been made by the defendant to other parties have also not been explained to the plaintiff.
Through her lawyers, she made a demand on the company for payment of the €1.3m she says she is owed, but says she has not been repaid.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here