He may have properties in Argentina, California, Dublin, London, France, Germany, Dubai, Kazakhstan and elsewhere and he may be associated with U2, yachts and the Cote d’Azur, but for all that, developer and businessman Paddy McKillen is not mega-rich. Or at least not according to the Sunday Times rich-list in 2009, when he was said to be worth €75m, and for a man whose wealth is primarily associated with property including Irish property, you would be doubtful about whether his financial position had improved since 2009.
We don’t have an up-to-date direct assessment of Paddy’s wealth but we do have a reflected assessment. During the recent marathon court case in London where Paddy took on the billionaire Barclay brothers over control of three hotels, Paddy was required to disclose details of his financial standing, though the details were suppressed as this part of the hearing was held in camera. However we do know that the judge concluded in his judgement that Paddy’s financial standing was such that Paddy couldn’t afford the GBP 45-60m (€56-€75m) that Derek Quinlan’s shareholding was estimated to be worth – “the evidence as to Mr McKillen’s overall financial position is such, I find, that he could not raise a conventional term facility for this”
Paddy lost his case against the Barclays with the judgment handed down in August, and this afternoon, there is reporting that the judge has awarded all costs against Paddy and the costs are said to be about GBP 20m (€25m). Given that there were 30-40 barristers, including QCs, and solicitors stuffed into the High Court for nearly two calendar months plus there was an appeal on one point to the UK’s appeal court, you can appreciate where the money went. The judge in the case, David Richards, really wasn’t enamoured with Paddy at all, and that was reflected in the judgment itself, so it is consistent if nothing else, that the judge has put all the costs on Paddy’s shoulders.
It was revealed during the hearing that Paddy owes Anglo (or IBRC as it is now known after the merger with INBS) and Bank of Scotland (Ireland) an overall total of €370m. Paddy may also have some further borrowings controlled by NAMA. Paddy was said to be considering an appeal against the rulings in the UK.
UPDATE: 12th September, 2012. Paddy has responded to the costs judgment apparently and is still in feisty form as he says that he will appeal the judgment given in August. Legal representatives of other parties in the case (not NAMA, it should be said) have been saying beastly things about Paddy in yesterday’s costs hearing, they even brought to the judge’s attention Paddy’s understandable reaction to the judgment in August, though the judge said that “wasn’t relevant”. Before awarding all costs against Paddy!