THE Taxing Master of the High Court has allowed Mr Larry Goodman £7.6 million for legal and other costs incurred at the Tribunal of Inquiry into the Beef Processing Industry. However, only part of Mr Goodman's total hotel bill was allowed.
Objections by the Minister for Finance to what he described as "excessive" fees allowed to Mr Goodman were rejected by the Taxing Master, Mr James Flynn.
Mr Goodman's claim for £3,356.11 for accommodation at Stephen's Hall, Leeson Street, Dublin, was reduced in his judgment to £600, amounting to six nights at £100 per night.
Cost accountants for the Goodman side had said his accommodation costs were £70 per night, his average dinner bill was between £4.20 and £8.80, and there were other charges for laundry, telephones and car parking. An allowance of £100 per night was therefore reasonable for the number of occasions Mr Goodman had needed to stay there.
The Taxing Master ruled that Mr Goodman had given evidence on four days and he allowed him six nights' accommodation.
The Minister, in his appeal against the amount originally allowed to Mr Goodman by the Taxing Master, strenuously objected to the Size of the legal fees, public relations and catering bills.
However, in a detailed judgment spanning more than 150 pages, Mr Flynn allowed the £7.6 million costs submitted on behalf of Mr Goodman and his companies.
A total of £3,197,975 was allowed for the fees of A & L Goodbody solicitors, consisting of £2,997.975 on an hourly rate basis, £100,000 for skill, knowledge, complexity and difficulty, and £100,000 for responsibility and effort.
Ms Caroline Preston had indicated that the firm's basic hourly internal rates were £180 for partners, £138 for associates, £98 for assistants and £52 for apprentices.
However, the Taxing Master accepted the contention of cost accountants for the Goodman side that a rate of £200 a hour for partners with a descending rate for the different levels of personnel "seemed fair and reasonable having regard to the level of expertise involved". The Minister had suggested an hourly rate ranging from £150 for partners to £50 for apprentices.
Based on hours worked, the Taxing Master allowed the following amounts: £1,485,920 for partners £1,417,515 for associates; £72,610 for assistants; and £21,930 for apprentices.
Fees totalling £872,735 were allowed for counsel representing the Goodman side during the 226 day tribunal at Dublin Castle. They were as follows: Mr Dermot Gleeson SC, £278,210; Mr Ian Finlay BL, £175,225; Mr Michael Collins BL, £115,475; Mr Seamus McKenna £129,250; Mr Donal O'Donnell BL, £174,575.
A further £554,000 was allowed for the work of Rory O'Donnell & Co, solicitors, including £200,000 for preparatory work, £100,000 for skill, specialised knowledge, responsibility and the magnitude of the case, and £154,000 for export credit issues.
The Minister, in his objections, said that if the solicitors had been charging on an hourly rate the hours billed would have reflected their reduced involvement on the common days (part days).
He submitted that it was "wholly inequitable to ask the Minister to pay for a full day when a full day was not involved". The Minister requested that the allowed total be reduced to £400,000.
The Taxing Master, however, said that, taking £2,000 as the daily rate for the 77 days solicitors had dealt with the export credit issues, he affirmed the allowance of £154,000 for the hearing days involved.
The £200,000 allowed for preparatory days amounted to the equivalent of 100 sitting days respect of an issue which took some 77 days to hear, including 21 part days. This was "a reasonable sum to remunerate the solicitors for the preparatory work", he said.
A total of £116,503.47 was allowed for the fees of Stokes Kennedy Crowley, with a £76,000 for the fees of Gardner and Price Waterhouse. A sum of £118,157.66 was for the fees of Somers and Associates.
Fees of £162,361 for the public relations services of Mr Pat Heneghan were also allowed.
The Minister had objected to the £33,906.17 allowed to Concept Catering Ltd for services to Mr Goodman and his staff during the tribunal. This disbursement was not necessary for the attainment of justice or for enforcing or defending the rights of Mr Goodman and his companies, the State claimed.
However, the Taxing Master said this objection was "unacceptable given the unique circumstances of the trial."