Tweet
Statements show depth of bitterness in Geaney case
PaulO'Kane
FORMER Elan boss Donal Geaney was to have remained as chairman of the company when he resigned as chief executive in July 2002, he claims in legal documents prepared for his forthcoming court case against Elan.
A series of witness statements, which have been seen by the Sunday Tribune, show that Geaney claims that, at a meeting in New York with three Elan directors, he was told that he had to resign as chief executive but could remain as chairman. Less than a week later, Geaney claims, he was informed that the board wanted him to relinquish both positions.
"This came as a complete shock to me and I protested about the change in the previous position," Geaney claims. But he also claimed that, while he felt the procedures governing his removal had not been followed, it was not in the shareholders' interests for him to "engage in open warfare with Elan".
The witness statements for the case, which relates to Geaney's alleged entitlement to exercise Elan share options worth $16.8m, show the depth of bitterness between the two sides. He claims he had two years in which to exercise the options after he left the payroll, but Elan disputes this.
The case is due to begin tomorrow at the Commercial Court in Dublin and according to one well-placed source there are currently no settlement talks between the two sides. Elan will vigorously contest Geaney's version of events, claiming that he only had nine months in which to exercise his options.
The witness statements also reveal that former Merrill Lynch boss Dan Tully, who was a director of Elan, was "upset, disappointed and indignant" at the manner in which certain members of the Elan board treated Geaney.
Tully may appear as a witness for Geaney, while former deputy chief executive Tom Lynch is likely to appear as a witness for the company. Lynch, who resigned his executive role in Elan at the same time as Geaney, claims that it was his view that he would only have 90 days in which to exercise his options.
The documents also reveal that, at the height of the crisis in 2002, Geaney became seriously ill and underwent major surgery. The Elan board considered announcing details of the illness but decided against it.
PaulO'Kane
FORMER Elan boss Donal Geaney was to have remained as chairman of the company when he resigned as chief executive in July 2002, he claims in legal documents prepared for his forthcoming court case against Elan.
A series of witness statements, which have been seen by the Sunday Tribune, show that Geaney claims that, at a meeting in New York with three Elan directors, he was told that he had to resign as chief executive but could remain as chairman. Less than a week later, Geaney claims, he was informed that the board wanted him to relinquish both positions.
"This came as a complete shock to me and I protested about the change in the previous position," Geaney claims. But he also claimed that, while he felt the procedures governing his removal had not been followed, it was not in the shareholders' interests for him to "engage in open warfare with Elan".
The witness statements for the case, which relates to Geaney's alleged entitlement to exercise Elan share options worth $16.8m, show the depth of bitterness between the two sides. He claims he had two years in which to exercise the options after he left the payroll, but Elan disputes this.
The case is due to begin tomorrow at the Commercial Court in Dublin and according to one well-placed source there are currently no settlement talks between the two sides. Elan will vigorously contest Geaney's version of events, claiming that he only had nine months in which to exercise his options.
The witness statements also reveal that former Merrill Lynch boss Dan Tully, who was a director of Elan, was "upset, disappointed and indignant" at the manner in which certain members of the Elan board treated Geaney.
Tully may appear as a witness for Geaney, while former deputy chief executive Tom Lynch is likely to appear as a witness for the company. Lynch, who resigned his executive role in Elan at the same time as Geaney, claims that it was his view that he would only have 90 days in which to exercise his options.
The documents also reveal that, at the height of the crisis in 2002, Geaney became seriously ill and underwent major surgery. The Elan board considered announcing details of the illness but decided against it.
Comment