The authorised officer appointed by Tanaiste and Enterprise and Employment Minister Mary Harney to two Dunnes Stores companies will be entitled to begin work after January 4th next, the High Court ruled yesterday.

Ms Justice Laffoy refused an application by Dunnes to have Ms Harney personally swear an affidavit setting out the reasons for her appointment of the authorised officer to Dunnes Stores (Ireland) and Dunnes Stores (ILAC Centre) Limited.

The matter arose following a judgment by Ms Justice Laffoy of November 18th last, in which she ordered that the Minister swear such an affidavit and lodge it with the High Court Chief registrar by November 27th. On receipt of that affidavit, Dunnes had 14 days before the authorised officer could take any action on foot of his appointment.

In court yesterday, Mr John McBratney SC, for the Minister, submitted that she has complied with the court order. He said an affidavit, sworn by Mr Paul Appleby, a principal officer in Ms Harney's department, had been lodged. It was normal for a ministerial official to swear an affidavit on behalf of a Minister, he said.

Mr Richard Law Nesbitt SC, for Dunnes, argued that the affidavit should have been personally sworn by Ms Harney. The two Dunnes companies affected had not been told that the Minister was unable to swear the affidavit or was out of the country.

This was not a small point, counsel argued. During the substantive hearing, there was a concern that the Minister could not, under Section 21 of the Companies Act 1990, give Dunnes the information it sought about the reasons for the appointment of the authorised officer. The Minister had also referred in a letter to "current concerns" about the affairs of Dunnes Stores.

But when Dunnes had received Mr Appleby's affidavit, these matters were absent from the list of reasons for the appointment of the authorised officer, counsel said. It was his case that the Minister herself had appointed the authorised officer and it was she who should swear an affidavit setting out the reasons for such an action.

Ms Justice Laffoy said her original order had been directed against the Minister as corporate soul, not against Ms Harney in person. A corporate soul could only comply, through somebody, with an order to give reasons. She directed that Mr Paul Appleby was a proper person to have filed the affidavit in compliance with her order and granted Dunnes an extension of time, until January 4th, before the authorised officer could take steps on foot of his appointment.