Dunnes may pursue former Taoiseach for reported payments

DUNNES Stores may still pursue Mr Charles Haughey for the money allegedly given to him by Mr Ben Dunne if enough evidence becomes…

DUNNES Stores may still pursue Mr Charles Haughey for the money allegedly given to him by Mr Ben Dunne if enough evidence becomes available, the tribunal was told.

Mrs Margaret Heffernan said that after the company had sent solicitors' letters to Mr Haughey seeking the money back, legal advice was taken about pursuing the matter further.

She agreed with a suggestion by counsel for Dunnes Stores holding companies and subsidiaries, Mr Garrett Cooney SC, that the advice given by lawyers, including a senior counsel, was that there would be "evidential difficulties" in bringing the matter to a successful conclusion.

On that advice they had decided not to take the matter further. The evidential difficulties related to the fact there were overseas transactions involved, making matters difficult to prove.

READ MORE

Mrs Heffernan also confirmed a suggestion by Mr Cooney that the company's position now was that, if further evidence came to light, particularly as a result of the tribunal, the matter would be reviewed.

She also referred, under cross examination from counsel for Mr Ben Dunne, Mr Seamus McKenna SC, to the second of her two meetings with Mr Haughey, during which they discussed the litigation taking place between members of the Dunne family.

Mr McKenna said Mr Haughey had requested the meeting and was effectively telling her to settle a company case. He suggested this was none of Mr Haughey's business.

Mrs Heffernan: "You are absolutely right, and without wanting to be downright rude to the man that was the impression I gave him."

Mrs Heffernan also told the inquiry that she was not aware at the time of payments being made to Mr Michael Lowry by her brother from an account held at the Bank of Ireland in Marino. It was not a company account, but she now regarded the money in it as having belonged to Dunnes Stores.

She also knew absolutely nothing about the arrangements which had been made as to the manner in which Mr Lowry was being paid. Nor did she know at the time how the £395,000 which had been spent on Mr Lowry's house had been dealt with in the company accounts.

After the split with her brother, she met Mr Lowry and told him - and he accepted - that the arrangement between his company and Dunnes Stores would have to be regularised. Matters had since proceeded on that basis.

She told counsel for Mr Lowry, Mr Donal O'Donnell SC, that Mr Lowry explained to her in late 1993 how the payments to him had been made. "I said there were a lot of things I was concerned about but everything had to be put on a proper business footing."

Mr O'Donnell: "And he was happy with that?"

Mrs Heffernan: "Yes."

She agreed with Mr McKenna that before 1993-94 she did not know of the political contributions which had been made by her brother.

Mr McKenna suggested she would have been aware, however, that her brother was known to be a man capable of spontaneous acts of great generosity. Mrs Heffernan: "Not to the extent I now know."

Mr McKenna said the fact that Mr Dunne had given £2 million to charity had been revealed during the court case which followed what his client had termed the "well documented" incident in Florida. Mrs Heffernan said the only recollection she had of that was when she read it in the tribunal this week.

Beginning his cross examination, Mr McKenna had put it to her that his client, like her, did not want to reopen "any old wounds". Mrs Heffernan replied: "No, we're friends now."