The question of whether a Dubliner appealed against a Criminal Assets Bureau tax bill of almost £2 million was vital to the CAB's application for judgment on it, a High Court judge said yesterday.
Mr Justice O'Higgins adjourned for a week CAB's application to have judgment for £1,984,626 entered against Mr Gerry Hutch (36), who lives in the Clontarf area of Dublin.
Two weeks ago CAB's application was adjourned by the Master of the High Court, Mr Harry Hill SC, until yesterday.
When the matter came before Mr Justice O'Higgins yesterday, Ms Gabrielle Wolfe, solicitor for Mr Hutch, asked for a two-week adjournment. She said counsel was not available and she wished to put in an affidavit. The judge asked why this had not been done earlier.
Ms Wolfe told the judge the assessment against Mr Hutch had been made on December 4th and the appeal had been handed in on December 30th last.
Mr Justice O'Higgins said he would adjourn the question of whether he would admit another affidavit.
The question of whether an appeal had been lodged or not was vital to the question of CAB's application for summary judgment against Mr Hutch, he said.
He said he awaited an explanation as to why the Master was not informed about the appeal.
Earlier Mr Justice O'Higgins inquired from Ms Wolfe why the affidavit had not been submitted between the hearing in the Master's court and yesterday.
Ms Wolfe said there had been pressure of work and the difficulty of getting Mr Hutch's tax consultant and counsel together at the same time.
She said she had the affidavit in a rough draft form.
Mr Justice O'Higgins asked who the counsel were who had not bothered to turn up. Ms Wolfe said her senior counsel was Dr Michael Forde. Dr Forde, who was present for another case before Mr Justice O'Higgins, said he was waiting for an extradition case to come on in another court. He believed the intention was that he was to be briefed.
Mr Justice O'Higgins, addressing Ms Wolfe, said Dr Forde had said he had not been briefed. Ms Wolfe said that to her knowledge both senior and junior counsel had been briefed.
Mr Justice O'Higgins asked if counsel had been briefed and adjourned the matter for a short period.
When the hearing resumed Ms Wolfe said it had been her belief that counsel had been briefed.
Mr Richard Nesbitt SC, for CAB, said Mr Hutch's lawyers had sought the adjournment before the Master. He urged that Mr Hutch should not be allowed to put in another affidavit.
The Master of the High Court had asked Mr Hutch's counsel why an appeal had not been lodged against the assessment and had given time for counsel to take instructions, Mr Nesbitt said. They had been unable to give any basis for failing to appeal.
Ms Wolfe said that when she was talking to counsel at the hearing before the Master she had been advised earlier that an appeal had been put in by Mr Hutch against the assessment but she did not have the date. She needed to verify everything.
Mr Justice O'Higgins said that perhaps he could have an explanation as to how the Master was not told there had been an appeal.
He would expect that in future an officer of the court would be in a position to tell him in relation to a particular case whether counsel had been briefed or not.
Mr Nesbitt said that when Mr Hutch and his tax adviser appeared before the court the judge would know there had been no appeal against the assessment on Mr Hutch's behalf.
Ms Wolfe said she strongly rejected that claim by Mr Nesbitt.