Lord of the Dance creator Michael Flatley allegedly has a beneficial shareholding in the company suing him over running of the multi-million pound stage show, the High Court in Belfast heard today.
Counsel for the star claimed he may be able to take control of Switzer Consulting Ltd and end the legal action brought against its “master”.
A judge ordered that the entertainment firm must disclose a deed of trust document at the heart of the dispute.
Switzer has issued proceedings against the choreographer and dancer for alleged breach of contract.
The case centres on a formal service agreement in July 2024 said to have allowed the firm to run Lord of the Dance.
Earlier this month Switzer obtained a temporary injunction to stop Mr Flatley from interfering in upcoming productions amid allegations about his financial situation.
With a 30th anniversary tour of the show set to get underway in Dublin on February 5, lawyers for the retired performer insist his participation and artistic direction is vital to its success.
They claimed the shows are in serious danger of “falling apart” without his involvement.
At a further hearing today, Mr Flatley’s barrister sought disclosure of the deed of trust in a bid to demonstrate his stake in Switzer.
David Dunlop KC argued the firm had been appointed and given a licence by his client to put on Lord of the Dance shows for a number of years.
Under that arrangement it was to receive between £35,000 and £40,000 a month in income, he alleged.
“The total value Switzer is entitled to (if every payment is made) in the context of Lord of the Dance, is considerably less than £3m sterling,” counsel submitted.
Based on an interpretation of shares either held outright or in trust, he claimed Mr Flatley has beneficial ownership in the company.
“It has brought an injunction against its master,” Mr Dunlop said.
“Mr Flatley, as we understand it, holds 100% of the beneficial interests in the plaintiff and is therefore in control of the entire shareholding.
“He would be in a position, with the benefit of that shareholding, to call an Extraordinary General Meeting to take over control of the company.”
The court was told he has allegedly been denied a document described as crucial in the case.
Mr Flatley is a man who keeps a close eye on his own personal affairs, he would be the first to admit that,” counsel said.
“But it may be that he can take complete control of the plaintiff (to terminate these proceedings).
“The plaintiff must provide the deed of trust.”
Confirming the star also disputes the validity of the 2024 agreement, Mr Dunlop indicated separate litigation is set to be brought in Dublin over the management of his assets.
He added it would be “quite incredible” if a document which could benefit his client was withheld on any grounds of data protection or confidentiality.
Gary McHugh KC, for Switzer, told the court he had just become aware of the issues raised about a deed of trust issue.
“Mr Flatley must have a copy of it himself, or if he has lost it presumably he had lawyers when it was created and they may have a copy of it.”
Opposing the application, he argued that any dispute over shares said to have been held in trust for Mr Flatley should be directed elsewhere.
Mr Justice Simpson also heard Switzer’s legal representatives could be prevented from making disclosure under any terms of confidentiality.
However, he ordered that a copy of the trustees must be provided for scrutiny restricted to Mr Flatley’s legal team.
Adjourning the case until next week, the judge stated: “If Mr Dunlop’s description of the contents is correct, it is a fundamental matter for the court.” ends
