Sign in | Join us  
      
 Popular Searches:diamond,cbn,tuck point blade,cup wheel,saw blade, brown fused alumina
Home -- Information


  Featured Companies
 • Yantai Cct Metal…
 • Dymend Tools Co.,…
 • Henan Boreas New…
 • Yancheng Xiehe Machinery…
 • EKF Industrial Supplies…
 • Ruishi New Material…
 • MORESUPERHARD
 • Henan Banner New…
 • Zhengzhou best synthetic…
 • Zhengzhou Haixu…

 Print  Add to Favorite
Custom your font size:     

Element Six 'siphoned off' 165m Euros in assets, court told


Post Date: 28 Nov 2013    Viewed: 393

Multinational Element Six “siphoned off” more than 165 million Euros in assets in the months before it told workers it could no longer contribute to their pension scheme, the High Court heard yesterday.


More than 100 members of the Shannon-based industrial diamond manufacturer’s defined-benefit plan are suing the fund’s trustees for breach of duty arising from the scheme’s closure in December 2011.


The scheme was closed after the company’s actuary, Willis, warned that a funding proposal put in place in 2008, involving a 10.7 million Euros annual payment from Element Six, was no longer adequate, and may have to be increased to 20 million Euros. The company said this was unsustainable.


Transfers

Workers’ senior counsel Paul Sreenan told the court that a report prepared for the trustees by insolvency practitioner Brian McEnery of Horwarth Bastow Charleton found that Element Six “siphoned off” a total of $225 million (165.8 million Euros) through transfers to other companies in the multinational group.


"Horwarth Bastow Charleton took issue with two specific payments,” Mr Sreenan said.


The first was a $68 million capital contribution to its Luxembourg-based parent on November 11th, 2010, which was made when Element Six was facing a 100 million Euros liability in respect of its pension. The second was a $19 million dividend paid a month later. Mr McEnery’s report argues that intercompany transfers made by Element Six during that time could have been “susceptible to challenge” if the company had been wound up.


The trustees commissioned the report in 2011 to establish how the fund would fare if Element Six were liquidated. The company had warned them that the pension liability threatened to close the plant.


It had offered a final payment of 34 million Euros, which included a 23 million Euros payment in respect of workers who were contributing to the scheme, as a full settlement of its obligations.


Mr Sreenan argued that details of a meeting on June 29th, 2011, attended by the trustees’ chairman, Danny Coady, finance director of one of its companies, and head of treasury Carmel Sexton, showed that Element Six wanted to orchestrate a situation where it would cut its pension liabilities and then wind up the scheme.


The case continues today before Mr Justice Peter Charleton and is expected to run for three weeks.


Superhard Material of China

Superhard Material of China

Abrasives and Grinding Products of China

Abrasives and Grinding Products of China

Coated Abrasives of China

Coated Abrasives of China

Chia International Abrasives & Grinding Exposition

China International Abrasives & Grinding Exposition

Home | About Us | Members | Contact | Advertising Quotation
Supported by Yuanfa Information Technology co.,Ltd
Copyright ©Abrasivesunion 2006. All rights reserved
Page rendered in 0.0198 seconds
增值电信业务经营许可证:豫B2-20202116  ICP备案:豫B2-20100036-2