Ex- business partner of Irish rugby ace Brendan Mullin is set to avoid bankruptcy

Bankruptcy petitions were filed against both Mr Mullin (60) and French telecoms entrepreneur Stephane Fund (56) last November.

The petitions related to a judgment for around €2m, secured against the two men in April 2022 by Mount Street Mortgage Servicing Limited.

The judgment related to loans used to fund the purchase of luxury apartments in Ballsbridge, Dublin, from the National Asset Management Agency (Nama).

The application against Mr Mullin was struck out in April, following a resolution with the creditor.

The court previously heard Mr Fund intended to fight the application he was facing.

But Mr Justice Liam Kennedy heard on Monday that the terms of a settlement have now been drawn up in the case involving Mr Fund. Details of the proposed settlement were not disclosed in court.

Mr Fund’s barrister Keith Farry said the matter could remain into the court’s list, where it will be mentioned again on July 15, pending the implementation of the settlement.

A petition hearing had been scheduled to take place on July 22.

Barrister Úna Nesdale, for the creditor, said the parties would be able to tell the court on July 15 whether the matter could be struck out.

Mr Fund had intended to fight the bankruptcy proceedings on the basis that Ireland was not his centre of main interests.

Mr Farry said at a previous hearing that his client was based in Dubai and that the matter was “not a case fit for the Irish jurisdiction”.

Mr Fund has had extensive business interests in Ireland through his involvement with various telecommunications firms and at one time had an address in Kilternan, Co Dublin.

He is now the chief executive of Workz, a SIM and eSIM solutions company in Dubai. According to that company’s website, he was the founder and CEO of Simulity Labs and also previously worked for Arm and Telefonica.

The Frenchman had also filed a motion seeking the cross examination of the Dublin City Sheriff in relation to efforts made to satisfy the judgment. But Mr Farry said this could be struck out.

At a previous hearing, the court heard Mr Fund intended to argue the sheriff went to the wrong address and that the petitioning creditor knew Mr Fund wasn’t at the address given.