Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 10: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the status of investigations by the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the Employment Appeals Tribunal and other agencies under the aegis of his Department into the liquidation of a company (details supplied) and subsequent creation of another company; if the situation has been resolved to his satisfaction; his views on whether new legislation will be required to prevent this situation recurring; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15463/07]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I indicated in replies to previous questions, matters arising from the liquidation of the company concerned are currently receiving attention from two of the agencies that operate under the aegis of my Department, the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement.

The latest position with regard to the involvement of the Employment Appeals Tribunal is that the tribunal commenced its hearing under section 9(3) of the Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Act 1984 on 21 March and adjourned it until 14 June. The situation regarding the insolvency and redundancy payments schemes will be considered by my Department following a decision by the tribunal.

The position in regard to the involvement of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement remains as described in my previous replies, namely that the liquidator of the company has been temporarily relieved by the director from the obligation to take restriction proceedings in the High Court, pending the receipt of a further report from the liquidator to the director under section 56 of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001.

Regarding new legislation relating to "phoenix" situations, I draw attention to the changes introduced by Part 5 of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001, which address problems and issues connected with business failure. Company law is also under continuing review, particularly through the work of the Company Law Review Group.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have brought this case to the Minister's attention on several occasions, and I am not satisfied that we have made the progress required to ensure that there is no replication elsewhere in the sector. The construction industry is particularly vulnerable to phoenix-type companies and the re-emergence of directors from one company in another. Their obligations to their employees, customers and, in the context of housing estates, planning legislation and residents, are not being met. Is the Minister satisfied that action taken by the various agencies under his remit has been sufficiently vigorous to ensure that, if there has been malfeasance in the area, it is vigorously prosecuted to create an example for any other companies that might otherwise wish to act in the same manner?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy has said, that would depend on whether there has been malfeasance, but the answer is "Yes". We have asked the Company Law Review Group to examine the case and ascertain what lessons might be learned from it. I referred to that earlier regarding the more comprehensive legislation on the way.