Wife of man being sued by John Magnier over Barne estate row says couple ‘steamrolled' into litigation they could not afford

Irish Times

11-07-2025

The wife of a man being sued by
John Magnier
over the purported sale of a coveted
Co Tipperary
estate to him has told the
High Court
the bloodstock billionaire allegedly threatened any sale of Barne estate to anyone other than him, as he claims was agreed, would put the defendants in 'litigation for years' and cost 'millions'.
Anna Thomson-Moore, the wife of defendant Richard Thomson-Moore, has told the High Court that the family had to take out a commercial loan in order to fight the case taken by Mr Magnier over the collapse of the alleged deal for the land.
Mr Magnier wants the court to enforce a €15 million deal he claims he agreed with Mr Thomson-Moore in a handshake deal for 751 acres of the land in Co Tipperary on August 22nd, 2023, at Mr Magnier's Coolmore home.
In her evidence on Friday, Ms Thomson-Moore told defence barrister Martin Hayden SC that on September 7th, 2023 – two weeks after the claimed handshake deal – Mr Magnier called to Barne with his son, JP, and met the Thomson-Moores, who told Mr Magnier they had to work through tax issues and involve the trustees of the estate to complete any deal.
READ MORE
Ms Thomson-Moore said at the end of that conversation their estate agent, John Stokes, who had walked out with the Magniers, returned to the house with two brown envelopes given to him by JP containing a total of €50,000 in cash about which she felt 'uncomfortable' and told Mr Stokes this.
Ms Thomson-Moore told Mr Hayden the money was put in their safe at Barne and that the following morning they decided to return the money as Ms Thomson-Moore was now 'very uncomfortable' with the situation.
The Magnier side has told the court the money was a token of 'appreciation' to the Thomson-Moores for letting the Magnier side on to the land before any sale was finalised.
John Magnier arriving at the High Court in Dublin in May. Photograph: Collins Courts
The Magnier side was ultimately gazumped by Irish-born, US-based construction magnate Maurice Regan, who offered €22.25 million and was made the preferred bidder. Mr Regan is not a party to the case.
The Magnier side has sued the Barne estate, Mr Thomson-Moore and three companies of IQEQ (Jersey) Ltd group, seeking to enforce the purported deal, which they say had been 'unequivocally' agreed.
The Barne defendants say there was never any such agreement, as they needed the consent of the trustees to finalise any agreement, and subsequently they preferred to sell the estate to Mr Regan.
The Barne estate has been held for the benefit of Richard Thomson-Moore and others by a Jersey trust.
Mr Magnier claims the deal had been agreed at the kitchen meeting and there had been no mention of it being subject to trustee approval, which he has said to the court on numerous occasions.
Ms Thomson-Moore told the High Court on Friday Mr Magnier was told a number of times before the alleged deal that any agreement was subject to the consent of the trustees.
Both sides entered into an exclusivity agreement from August 31st to September 30th, 2023, stipulating the estate would not permit itself or its representatives to solicit or encourage any expression of interest, inquiry or offer on the property from anyone other than Mr Magnier.
During September 2023, said Ms Thomson-Moore, Mr Regan had offered around €20 million for the estate but the trustees recommended honouring the exclusivity agreement with Mr Magnier.
Ms Thomson-Moore said she was 'frustrated' that the trustees were not looking at the higher offer at all.
After the expiry of the exclusivity deal, she said there was a 'flurry' of calls in early October 2023, during which time Mr Stokes told the Thomson-Moores Mr Magnier had told the estate agent he would take the matter to court and 'tie this up for years and millions in litigation'.
Ms Thomson-Moore said a commercial loan was taken out by the defendants under Barne Estate Ltd to provide liquidity to defend the Magnier action.
'We did not have the means to defend these proceedings without a loan. I think it is important to have access to justice and we were being steamrolled into proceedings because of a lack of cash and it would not be fair. It felt like an onslaught of proceedings that kicked off very quickly,' she told the court.
Ms Thomson-Moore, a solicitor, said the stress and impact of the proceedings initiated against them had been 'enormous' and that this had become 'oppressive'. She said it also had delayed the family's plans to move to her native Australia to attend to the health needs of their son, who needs around-the-clock care.
The case continues before Mr Justice Max Barrett.