A group of investors claiming to have lost millions of euros in an electronic trade trophy have instituted a High Court compensation action against an Irish registered company and its Irish and Israeli directors.
They have filed charges against Greymountain Management, which is currently in liquidation, and which the Supreme Court has heard, its four directors – brothers Jonathan and David Cartu living in Israel and Dublin-based directors Ryan Coates and Liam Grainger.
The investors claim that they believed they were investing in a complex trade known as binary options, while in fact the software system on which their transactions were conducted was rigged to ensure that they lost their money.
Also known as & # 39; all-or-nothing options & # 39 ;, binary options are a product whereby the investor receives either a fixed amount if it is successful, or nothing at all of his investment.
The outcome of the investment depends entirely on the outcome of a yes / no proposition. The yes / no proposition depends on whether the price of a particular asset will rise above or below a certain amount at a specific date and time.
The investors, from the United States, Canada, Singapore, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom, claim that the suspects encouraged them to open binary accounts with false claims that they would achieve substantial profits.
The investors paid payments to Greymountain, which is said to have played a crucial role in the scheme.
It is claimed that Mr. Grainger, of Charlemont, Griffith Avenue, Dublin 9, and Mr. Coates, of Hogan Square, Hogan Place, Dublin 2, operated and operated Greymountain for the alleged scam and acted as agents for the Cartu brothers who were shadow directors of the company.
In their action, investors try to demand compensation for deception, breach of contract, breach of duty and conspiracy to deceive the plaintiffs.
Greymountain Management was previously the subject of regulatory and revenue research, which led to the appointment of a bankruptcy trustee in the company in 2017. The bankruptcy trustee did not object to the investor's request and did not agree with it.