A High Court dispute over a whisky brand created by Conor McGregor will be heard later this year after a judge approved requests to change the date of the original claim.
On Wednesday, Judge Nessa Cahill gave Artem Lobov the opportunity to amend his motions in the case, in which he alleges Mr McGregor entered into an oral agreement with him for a 5 per cent share of the gym he received in 2017.
The court heard that Mr Lobov now claims that the meeting at which the verbal agreement was reached took place on 9 October 2017, rather than in September 2017 as previously claimed. This emerged after Mr Lobov, in preparation for the hearing, found an old mobile phone which confirmed that the meeting did not take place in September 2017.
It also came as Mr Lobov was aware that Mr McGregor had lost a boxing match to Floyd Mayweather in August 2017. The court heard that Mr McGregor was in Ibiza in September and said he could not have been present on the date Mr Lobov had originally indicated.
Mr Lobov, originally from Russia, claims he played a major role in the creation and development of the Proper Number Twelve Irish whiskey brand, which was reportedly sold for $600 million (€529 million) to Proximo Spirits in 2021. Mr McGregor is said to have made $130 million from the sale.
Proximo severed its ties with Mr McGregor and the brand after a separate High Court case last year, where a civil jury ruled he must pay almost €250,000 for raping a woman named Nikita Hand in a Dublin hotel in December 2018. That ruling was appealed.
The whisky trial was due to take place this week but was adjourned to allow Mr Lobow, of Mulhaddart, Dublin, to apply to amend his case after an old phone was found with details confirming the October date.
McGregor's side, which denied the existence of an oral agreement, opposed the amendment.
On Wednesday, after hearing arguments from lawyers for both sides, Mrs Justice Cahill said she was satisfied that the amendment should be granted. She approved the case being sent for a hearing, but stressed that it was unlikely to be scheduled until the end of the long court holiday.
Earlier, Andrew Walker, the chief prosecutor, said Mr Lobov told his lawyer Dermot McNamara he had found the old phone in March.
While his side acknowledged that it would have been much better to have made the amendment earlier, the law clearly allows a plaintiff to make applications for amendment at any time, and the court has wide discretion to grant them.
He said this was not a case where the defendant had suffered irreparable harm and the case did not necessarily have to be dismissed, but rather that these were just two obstacles to amendment.
He acknowledged that the defence would have to face three witnesses who were due to give evidence for Mr McGregor and would now have to work out where they were in the relevant week of October 2017. That was not an insurmountable hurdle but it would take longer, he said.
Mr Walker also acknowledged that the amendment would have financial implications for his client.
Lead lawyer Remy Farrell, representing Mr McGregor, agreed there was no irreparable harm or that the case was doomed to fail.
“But those who receive forgiveness must admit their guilt or at least explain how it happened,” he added.
Sourse: breakingnews.ie
