Dispute between two dentists resolved, court hears
High Court case concerned two dentists who operate separate practices out of same premises
Welcoming the resolution, Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds agreed to strike out the case. File Photograph: Martin Rickett/PA Wire
A High Court dispute between two dentists who operate separate practices out of the same premises has been resolved.
The resolution came after both parties withdrew all allegations of improper conduct against each other.
In proceedings initiated last June, Dr Maguire had claimed that relationship became “toxic” and claimed his staff were put under surveillance by a secret camera installed by Dr Hiney in a hole in the ceiling of the shared premises .
Dr Hiney said the camera was put in for security reasons and denied it was used to spy on Dr Maguire or his staff, as alleged.
Dr Maguire did not accept that explanation and sought various injunctions against Dr Hiney.
The case was adjourned from time to time.
When it returned before the court on Thursday, Stephen Byrne BL, for Dr Maguire, said, following “a second mediation” between the parties that ended late on Wednesday night, the proceedings had been settled and could be struck out.
As part of the settlement, counsel read a statement to the court.
It said: “In the course of the division of the two dentist’s practices a number of difficulties and disagreements arose between the parties. These unfortunately resulted in various allegations and counter allegations being made about the conduct of the dentists and their respective employees, including in the proceedings that came before the court.
“These proceedings have compromised in terms acceptable to the two dentists.
“For the avoidance of doubt the dentists unconditionally withdraw all and any allegations of improper conduct of any description against each other made during this difficult period.
“Dr Maguire now acknowledges that in installing CCTV cameras in the premises that Dr Hiney did not intend to survey Dr Maguire or his patients.
“Dr Maguire understands that Dr Hiney installed the cameras following consultation with An Garda Síochána.
“Dr Maguire now further acknowledges that any contact by Dr Hiney of Dr Maguire’s patients was not for the purposes of solicitation.”
Both Dr Maguire and Dr Hiney are now pleased that the proceedings have been resolved,” the statement concluded.
No other details of the settlement agreement were outlined.
Welcoming the resolution, Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds agreed to strike out the case.
In his action, Dr Maguire claimed there had been a host of issues between the dentists, ranging from petty complaints to serious allegations of criminal behaviour between the two.
He claimed Dr Hiney made allegations against him, including assault, defamation, harassment, vandalism and withholding of information from insurers about the building they share.
Dr Maguire rejected all the allegations against him.
Dr Maguire had also claimed Dr Hiney had engaged in a marketing campaign, including sending text messages, in an effort to solicit his patients.
Further claims included that Dr Hiney had engaged people to commence works on the exterior of the premises.
All of the allegations were denied by Dr Hiney, who said he never intended to have any construction works carried out on the shared premises as long as Dr Maguire’s business was operating out of the building.