Colm Wu firms allegedly owed €3m by Department of Justice for housing Ukrainians, court hears

Companies linked to the businessman Colm Wu are allegedly owed up to €3 million by the Department of Justice for providing accommodation to Ukrainian refugees, the High Court has heard. David Whelan SC, appearing for the liquidators of several of Mr Wu’s firms, on Thursday asked Mr Justice Mark Sanfey to make a direction compelling Mr Wu to provide documents supporting the claim that up to three of his firms are owed the money. Advertisement Insolvency practitioners Myles Kirby and Padraic O’Malley have taken High Court proceedings against Mr Wu, claiming the Chinese national was involved in a scheme to divert money out of his companies to pay debts and obligations.

The liquidators claim Mr Wu had engaged in fraudulent and/or reckless trading and had transferred assets of the companies to related companies and in some cases to himself. It is alleged he failed to keep proper books and records, breached his fiduciary duties and was guilty of misfeasance. The liquidators say that based on investigations to date Mr Wu left creditors of the trading companies, as well as Revenue and trade creditors, unpaid in many instances.



Instead, it is claimed, money that was the property of the companies, was used to pay the liabilities of other companies in a manner that benefited Mr Wu. Advertisement On Thursday, Mr Wu’s counsel Ross Gorman BL, said the reasoning for the Department of Justice’s non-payment of fees to Abbey Lane Hotel (Property) Ltd – a Wu-linked company – for the housing of Ukranian refugees was the company’s lack of a tax clearance certificate. The court heard that Mr Wu also does not personally hold a tax clearance certificate.

Mr Gorman said he had no issue with providing documentation in support of his client’s claims about the money owed. A letter sent by the liquidator’s solicitors to Mr Wu’s side on Wednesday invited the defendants to make certain concessions in the proceedings, Mr Gorman said. Mr Justice Sanfey said that he would adjourn the case to allow Mr Wu to consider the proposals in the letter.

The judge said that he wanted to be apprised of Mr Wu’s attitude towards the letter, and asked that his response be furnished to the court. He adjourned the case to later in the month..