Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 324: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if his attention has been drawn to cases where the phoenixing of foreign based companies has had a direct or indirect negative impact on Irish subcontractors of such companies; and if legislation exists to prevent such negative impact. [34858/05]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 325: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if his attention has been drawn to the cases of phoenixing of companies here; if legislation to combat such actions will be considered or if he has satisfied himself that the existing legal and regulatory framework is sufficiently robust to deal with such eventualities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34859/05]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 326: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the laws, directives or regulations which are in place at European level to prevent the phoenixing of companies; if there are issues or concerns with conducting business with businesses which are governed by different national laws, which may not offer the same level of protection as applies here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34860/05]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 327: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if his attention has been drawn to the case (details supplied) in which the main contractor has ceased trading here, though continued in the UK, and has left a number of locally based Irish subcontractors awaiting payment of outstanding invoices; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34861/05]

Pat Carey (Dublin North West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 328: To ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the measures which are in place to prevent companies who owe substantial sums to individuals or other companies declaring bankruptcy for the purpose of recommencing trading under a new name for the sole purpose of avoiding their legal responsibilities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34862/05]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 324 to 328, inclusive, together.

The Office of Director of Corporate Enforcement has made inquiries into the matter of the status of Controlled Demolition Group and he understands that joint administrators were appointed to the company under the provisions of the UK Insolvency Act 1986, as amended by the Enterprise Act 2002. He also understands that, following the appointment of the joint administrators, the business and assets of the company, including the company name but not the company itself, was sold to another company. Under the provisions of UK law, the joint administrators of the company are obliged to give a report to creditors not later than eight weeks after their appointment which will address their actions since appointment and will include an indication of the likely surplus available, if any, to pay creditors.

With regard to European Law, the most recent legislation in the area is the European cross border insolvency regulation — Council Regulation (EC) No. 1346/2000 dated 29 May 2000. The regulation ensures that most forms of insolvency proceedings are mutually recognised within member states of the European Union. The regulation sets out under Article 39 the right of any creditor to lodge a claim and Article 40 deals with the duty to inform known creditors of insolvency proceedings. The regulation also provides for equal treatment of creditors.

The main company law provisions in Ireland dealing with companies who fail and re-engage in trading under a new name are addressed under the Companies Acts 1963 to 2005 and in particular under the provisions of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001. Section 56 introduced a new reporting obligation by liquidators in respect of all insolvent liquidations to the Director of Corporate Enforcement. The liquidators of such companies are legally obliged to bring proceedings for the restriction of directors unless relieved of this obligation by the Director of Corporate Enforcement. The director also has additional powers available to him to pursue directors of insolvent companies that have not been placed into liquidation.

The Deputy will be aware that business failure is an unfortunate fact of life. However, not all business failure is a result of unlawful business practice. If the creditors of the company are aware of specific breaches of UK company law they may wish to bring these to the attention of the appropriate UK authorities, which are the UK insolvency service, in the context of breaches of the Insolvency Acts and the Department of Trade and Industry for wider breaches of the UK companies acts.