The Supreme Court has reserved judgment on an application by two brothers for a re-trial of their action against the Irish Brokers' Association for damages for defamation.

Mr Albert Dawson (63), Knocknashee, Goatstown, Dublin, and his brother, Dudley (59), Maywood Drive, Raheny, Dublin, were awarded £515,000 in damages by a jury in the High Court in July 1995.

The brothers, trading as A. E. Dawson and Sons, insurance brokers, Maywood Drive, Raheny, had claimed they were defamed in a circular sent by the Irish Brokers' Association (IBA) to its 600 members in 1992. The circular stated that their firm was no longer a member of the association. The IBA, which had denied the claim, appealed the case to the Supreme Court. In February 1997, that court ruled the award was excessive and ordered a re-trial in the High Court on the question of damages only.

When the re-trial came before the High Court last February, Mr Justice Budd made a number of rulings in regard to the Dawsons' pleadings. After opening their case to the jury, the brothers indicated to the court that they did not wish to continue with the case in the light of the judge's rulings.

When the jury returned, Mr Justice Budd dismissed the Dawson brothers' action.

Yesterday, both men, who are representing themselves, said they were appealing against the order of Mr Justice Budd which, they submitted, had effectively ruled out most of their pleadings in their action for damages.

Mr Albert Dawson said the judge had been deceived in the representations made to him on behalf of the IBA and he claimed the circular issued by the IBA was deliberately circulated for malicious reasons.

He and his brother should have been allowed to give evidence of the harassment they had endured from the IBA before the issuing of the defamatory circular, Mr Dawson said. He and his brother had wished to produce this evidence before a jury.

Mr Dawson claimed the IBA was engaged in criminal acts. Because he and his brother had set out to expose its wrongdoing, they were defamed by the association, he claimed.

Mr Garret Cooney SC, for the IBA, said Mr Justice Budd had made a number of rulings in the High Court. The Dawsons had then decided not to continue with the case and had walked out. Consequently, the judge had had no option but to discharge the jury, he said.

If the case had gone ahead, it was clear that the Dawsons were going to put his client on trial for alleged revenue offences and would seek to introduce Mr Tony Taylor into the case if they could, counsel said.

If the Dawsons had been professionally represented and their lawyer had walked out of the court in protest against Mr Justice Budd's ruling, the appeal now before the Supreme Court would not be taking place, Mr Cooney said.

Mr Albert Dawson said he was now seeking a re-trial of the brothers' case before a judge and jury. He and his brother had given records to the defence showing how their income had increased in the five years before the defamation and fallen in the five years afterwards.

Mr Justice O'Flaherty, presiding, said the court would reserve judgment.