Liverpool cult hero Steve Finnan is facing a bankruptcy battle following a multi-million pound row between the Champions League winner and his brother.
Irish full-back Steve Finnan, 47, enjoyed a successful Premier League career, winning Champions League and FA Cup winners’ medals while with Liverpool in the 2000s, but has been embroiled in a decade-long legal tussle with his brother Sean after the pair got involved in a disastrous property business together.
The 49-year-old first sued his brother in 2016 after growing concerned with the manner in which the business was being run. The pair agreed a £4million settlement at the High Court in 2018.
However, the former footballer did not receive his money and his brother was declared bankrupt in July 2019.
What has followed has been a series of court battles with his solicitors, including a failed negligence claim of around £6million.
That case ended with Finnan facing a costs bill amounting to five figures.
Former Liverpool star Steve Finnan is facing bankruptcy after a decade-long legal battle
The Irishman enjoyed a strong career at Anfield, winning the Champions League and FA Cup
Finnan has not paid his debt following that case and now faces a bankruptcy petition from Central London County Court, according to The Independent.
The former Liverpool star attended a High Court hearing on Monday where he attempted to appeal against orders made earlier in the bankruptcy case.
He was told, however, that his appeal was ‘hopeless’ and he was only ‘delaying’ things.
‘I form the strong view that this appeal simply amounts to an attempt on his part to delay the final hearing of this petition for as long as possible,’ said Mr Justice Mellor.
Finnan, who represented himself, claimed that his case was too ‘complex’ to be heard in the County Court and said there was ‘apparent bias’ against him by District Judge Revere before questioning her jurisdiction.
However, Justice Mellor disputed Finnan’s ‘complexity’ argument, saying that the costs order amounts to a figure less than £50,000.
‘Standing back, it is surprising that Mr Finnan has challenged this directions order…his complaints are largely procedural and have no substance,’ he said.
‘I form the strong view that this appeal simply amounts to an attempt on his part to delay the final hearing of this petition for as long as possible.
‘I refuse permission to appeal and I dismiss the appeal. I also certify this appeal is totally without merit. It was, at all times, completely hopeless.
However, after retiring the defender entered into a failed property business with his brother
‘The petition will have to be the subject of further directions. I think they’re best given by a judge in the insolvency list.
‘It is highly likely that any such further order for directions will repeat the directions in District Judge Revere’s order.’
In an effort to cover his extensive court costs, Finnan sold his 2005 Champions League winner’s medal for at least £12,000 as well as his match worn shirts in 2020.
Limerick-born Mr Finnan began his career with non-league Welling United, rising through the football pyramid to eventually play for Liverpool between 2003 and 2008.
He played for Ireland 52 times and, in 2005, was part of the Liverpool team which famously came back from 3-0 down to win the Champions League against Milan.
He is the only footballer to have played in the World Cup, Champions League, UEFA Cup, Intertoto Cup, all four levels of English league football and the conference.
He retired in 2010 and went into property, providing the cash for a south west London-based property business, run through two companies which he owned with his brother, Sean.
Among the portfolio of the business, which was managed by Sean, were a substantial house in The Green, beside Wimbledon Common, properties in nearby Ridgeway Place, and several flats elsewhere.
Master McQuail said the ‘first expression of the claimant’s concerns’ about the business had come in an email from Mr Finnan to the companies’ solicitor in 2016.
She said he complained that despite ‘significant funding from the claimant by way of loans, the companies appeared to have no money, at least in part because Sean had spent it personally.’
He said money had been wasted on legal issues which were ‘down to Sean,’ that his brother’s dealings with a contractor had been ‘needlessly expensive’ and that there was a risk the companies would default on loans.
Mr Finnan spoke to Charles Russell Speechlys and instructed the firm to file ‘unfair prejudice’ petitions against his brother.
Sean defended the claims, admitting there had been an ‘irretrievable break down of mutual trust and confidence’ with his brother, but denying any misconduct.
Mr Finnan then changed his lawyers, but the case did not go to trial, with the brothers settling outside court, with Sean agreeing to transfer his shares in the company which owned The Green to Mr Finnan and to pay him £4m.
That sum was not paid and in 2019 and Mr Finnan had his brother adjudged bankrupt.
He said his only recoveries from the disaster were £187,570 from the sale of the company which owned The Green and £89,345 following the sale of another property.
Mr Finnan went on to sue his former solicitors, claiming that he should have been advised to request repayment of director’s loans he had made to the companies, rather than file the ‘unfair prejudice’ petitions.
He said he had lost £3.3m in loans to the companies, £2.6m in shares, about £400,000 in lawyers’ bills, as well as other money, totalling more than £6m.
However the solicitors defended the claim, insisting that Mr Finnan had been determined to pursue legal proceedings against his brother.
He had also failed to show how he could have escaped from the situation in any better position than he in fact did, since the companies had no money to repay his loans with anyway.
Giving judgment for the solicitors, Master McQuail said whatever advice he received, Mr Finnan had in fact made demands for repayment of the directors’ loans – and got nothing.
‘Neither Sean nor the companies responded by meeting the demands with payment at any stage after Charles Russell Speechlys were instructed,’ she said.
Arsenal
Tottenham
*18+, excludes NI. Terms and conditions apply
Finnan had to sell his winner’s medal from that night in Istanbul to fund his legal battle
‘There is no evidence of the means, against the background of the known cash position and the known eventual working out of the settlement agreement, by which the making of any such demands would or could have led to a better result than that which the claimant actually achieved.’
She added: ‘The claimant’s case that he was not advised to make demands is contradicted by his own evidence and the correspondence that shows that demands were in fact made.
‘The fact is that Sean did not respond to any demands after Charles Russell Speechlys were instructed by making or causing the companies to make any repayment.
‘There is nothing in the claimant’s evidence which supports a credible and realistic case that any different and better outcome than he achieved could ever have been achieved.
‘I am therefore satisfied that the claimant’s presently pleaded particulars of claim disclose no reasonable ground for bringing the claim.’
