Mary Mitchell O'Connor (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

While I note that the Senators propose to introduce more prescriptive criteria in terms of the circumstances the court ought to address when considering whether a related company should contribute to the debts of a company being wound up, I am not satisfied the amendment, as drafted, adds to the settled provision.As I already stated, I am not in favour of accepting this amendment. I do not wish to disrupt existing law until I have received the totality of the recommendations from the Company Law Review Group, CLRG. I am not sure the Senator’s amendment will strengthen section 599. I strongly recommend we wait for the expert group report from the CLRG which is looking at section 599. Adding criteria before the report is received could inadvertently narrow the scope of the courts’ powers. That is a risk I do not think we should take.

I appreciate there is a need to be seen to be providing a fix to a Clerys-type situation. I was as disgusted as Members and the rest of the nation were with the whole Clerys events. However, it is not so simple. Duffy and Cahill noted in their expert report on the examination and review of the laws on the protection of employee interests when assets are separated from the operating entity that it seems section 599 is a potentially useful remedy. However, it is only when the provision is tested in the courts that any necessary amendments may become apparent. Accordingly, I am not in favour of this amendment. I understand a subgroup of the CLRG has met several times to consider the wider range of provisions contained in the Companies Act. I am looking forward to the CLRG report. While I cannot say exactly when I am going to receive it, I understand it is actively engaged and it will be soon.