A legal dispute between five businessmen arising from their involvement in a proposed €3.3 million hotel and fishing lodges development in Co Mayo has been settled at the High Court. Mary Carolan reports.
During the proceedings, Mr Enda Hunston, a financial adviser, had claimed his signature was forged on a joint investment agreement of March 28th, 2002, relating to the proposed development of Mount Falcon Castle Hotel, which is located on a 100-acre site near Ballina, Co Mayo.
In announcing the settlement of the action yesterday, Mr Paul Gallagher SC, for the defendants - Mr Barry Maloney, former chief executive of Esat Digifone, his brothers Alan and James and a UK venture capitalist, Mr Bruce Dunlevie - said the defendants accepted that the signature on page 16 of the agreement was not Mr Hunston's.
The defendants were not responsible for placing the signature on that page, counsel added. Mr Gallagher told Mr Justice Ó Caoimh the case had settled and could be struck out with no order and on the basis of liberty to apply.
The action by Mr Hunston against the Maloneys and Mr Dunlevie was at hearing for seven days when the settlement was announced yesterday and Mr Alan Maloney was in the course of giving his direct evidence. The costs of the hearing are estimated at more than €500,000.
During the hearing, a forensic scientist, Dr Audrey Giles, and a handwriting expert, Mr Steve Cossett, both from the UK, said they believed the disputed signature was not made by Mr Hunston but by another person. Both witnesses also ruled out the possibility that Mr Hunston had forged his own signature.
The defendants had contended the disputed agreement was among a number of documents signed on March 28th in relation to the closing of the deal between the vendors of the Mount Falcon site on one hand and Mr Hunston, the Maloney brothers and Mr Dunlevie on the other.
The defendants said they did not forge Mr Hunston's signature. During the hearing, Mr Gallagher said the defendants did not know how the disputed signature came about and described it as "a mystery".
The defendants also denied the arrangement involving them and Mr Hunston was a partnership and pleaded the joint investment agreement specifically excluded a partnership.
Earlier yesterday, in his evidence, Mr Alan Maloney said his 14-year friendship with Mr Hunston began to deteriorate from May 2003, from when he believed Mr Hunston was advocating the candidacy of a particular contracting firm, Mitchell O'Grady Construction, for the project.
He said Mr Hunston had admitted to him later in 2003 that, prior to a decision being made on the award of the tender, that he had passed a confidential document relating to the tender process to Mitchell O'Grady and had apologised for that to the Maloney brothers.
He said Mr Hunston had told him there would be serious implications if Mitchell O'Grady were not awarded the contract. Mr Maloney said he had interpreted that remark as "a threat" and had asked him to elaborate.
He said Mr Hunston had said the project would have lost the benefit of the political connections of Mitchell O'Grady.