ACOA sues Marport group for $2.3M
Afederal investment agency is suing a formerly Newfoundland-based award-winning ocean tech company for more than $2 million.
The Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency filed claims late last month against Marport Deep Sea Technologies and several affiliated companies under the Marport name for money lent between 2008 and 2011.
In all, the three statements of claim, each with more than one defendant — Marport Deep Sea Technologies, Marport Canada, Marport Marine Canada and Marine Robotics — total $2.3 million.
As reported by The Telegram last year, Marport — a subsea technology company that produced specialized sonar systems — effectively vanished from Newfoundland after going into receivership in September 2013 following a deterioration of its financial situation.
Marport’s intellectual property was being bought by various companies, such as Nautel in Nova Scotia and New Hampshire’s Airmar Technology.
According to the statements of claim, Marport’s falling into receivership constitutes default of the loan agreement.
The agency sent letters to the Marport companies involved seeking repayment of everything by the following month, but says no payments have been made by the companies since Marport went into receivership.
It was a quiet and quick end to the company’s onetime strong presence in the province, with longtime president and CEO Karl Kenny — who co-founded Marport Canada in 2003, the parent company having been formed in Iceland in 1996 — being named to the Junior Achievement Hall of Fame in 2012.
At his induction, Kenny’s work with Marport was highlighted, but according to Kenny’s biography on spinoff company Kraken, Kenny ended his stint as president and CEO late the previous year.
In 2012, Marport was named to industry publication Marine Technology Reporter’s Top 100 list of sig- nificant companies for the fifth year in a row.
Last year, former Marport Deep Sea Technologies director Derrick Rowe told The Telegram he was disappointed with the final outcome.
“I think the underlying technology and the underlying business was still valid and strong, but that doesn’t always necessarily mean the structure worked,” he said. “I think it really is irrelevant where it was (located) and I don’t think there was any Newfoundland component that was negative at all. I think it was just the situation that the company took on a lot of debt and risk, and sometimes that needs to be restructured. And that’s what happened. It got restructured, and when it got restructured, the Newfoundland component was not really part of it anymore.”
Calls to Kraken requesting comment from Kenny were not returned as of The Telegram’s deadline.