BUSINESSMEN OWEN O’Callaghan and John Deane are among a number of Cork-based individuals and companies who have taken a High Court challenge to the Mahon tribunal’s refusal to give them any draft findings relating to them which may be included in its final report.
They claim that the tribunal’s refusal to provide them with the information before publication of its final report breaches their rights to fair procedures and to their good names.
The tribunal into certain planning matters and payments, consisting of Judge Alan Mahon, Judge Mary Faherty and Judge Gerald Keys, has opposed the application. It claims that the refusal to furnish the parties with any draft findings fully respects their natural and constitutional rights.
The judicial review proceedings have been brought by Mr O’Callaghan, Glen Farm Upper, Rochestown Road; Mr Deane, Invercairn, Monastery Road; Riga and Barkhill Ltd, Lavitt’s Quay Cork; Aidan Lucey, Birchley, Model Farm Road; Clare Cowhig, Dunbóige, Churchyard Lane, Well Road, and CHK Partnership, South Mall (all Cork), to bring judicial review proceedings against the tribunal.
Their application arises from evidence given to the tribunal over Barkhill’s acquisition of an interest in the Quarryvale site in Co Dublin. Mr O’Callaghan and Mr Deane, a solicitor and property developer, are both directors of Riga and Barkhill and Mr Lucey is the secretary of both firms.
Ms Cowhig, an accountant with CHK, gave evidence related to work done for the O’Callaghan companies.
The parties want orders quashing the tribunal’s refusal of October 28th and December 19th 2008 to give them any draft findings referring to them to be incorporated in the tribunal’s report.
They want an order compelling the tribunal to provide each of them with a copy of any draft findings relating to them and the chance to be provided with a reasonable opportunity of being heard in connection with any such findings.
Paul Sreenan SC, for the plaintiffs, said yesterday that they had concerns about the effect on their good names and reputations from any adverse findings by the tribunal.
While his clients were aware of allegations made mainly by Tom Gilmartin and to a lesser extent by broadcaster Eamon Dunphy, they had not been furnished with any statement or list of allegations made against them which the tribunal has indicated it is investigating.
The applicants could not make meaningful submissions in the absence of any statement of allegations and it was on that basis that copies of any draft findings were sought.
All had given extensive evidence to the tribunal, with Mr O’Callaghan giving 15 statements and Mr Deane giving three.
His clients had asked the tribunal for any draft findings to be provided so meaningful submissions could be made in reply. The tribunal had replied, while inviting submissions on relevant matters, that it was not going to provide copies of the draft findings.
In an affidavit, Mr O’Callaghan said the tribunal had been a significant feature in his life for the last 10 years and had taken an immense toll on his business.
He had always fully co-operated with the tribunal and was concerned about the consequences any adverse findings may have.
In response, the tribunal denied that the refusal to furnish the draft findings would damage the parties’ good names, that the refusal is unfair or that the refusal is a breach of their natural and constitutional rights.
The tribunal added that the evidence tendered by any witness before the tribunal had yet to be determined by the tribunal members, whose deliberations were ongoing.
The case, before Mr Justice Iarfhlaith O’Neill, continues.