A farm labourer who worked unpaid for 33 years on a promise that he would inherit a €600,000 farm was left without a penny to feed himself, the High Court was told yesterday.
Ms Margaret Nerney SC, representing Mr Maurice Grogan (47), of Killyon, Birr, Co Offaly, said that her client had worked on the farm from the age of 14 until the death of his employer, Mr Michael Tomelty, last November.
Ms Nerney told Mr Justice Butler that no will had been made by Mr Tomelty and when Mr Grogan had gone to the welfare authorities to seek help he had been told that no PAYE or PRSI payments had been made on his behalf.
"Apart from his keep, he would be given the odd £20 note if he wanted to go out somewhere," Ms Nerney said. "In 33 years, he took three days' holidays to visit relatives in England."
She said that Mr Grogan had operated a successful agricultural contracting business for Mr Tomelty from the 118-acre farm at Coagh, Killyon, where he had gone to work after leaving school.
"He worked from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. during the height of the harvest and wasn't paid a penny. When any such matter was raised, Mr Tomelty would always promise him that he would be well looked after," Ms Nerney said.
"He was told he would get the place and the lands and would not have any money problems."
Ms Nerney said that part of the farm was to be sold at auction today and Mr Grogan was seeking an injunction restraining Mr Tomelty's brother, Mr Pat Joe Tomelty, from going ahead with the sale.
Mr Eamon Marray, counsel for Mr Pat Joe Tomelty, of Killyon, said that only 23 acres, worth about €120,000, was being auctioned today, leaving approximately 95 acres to meet any claim Mr Grogan might be deemed to have.
Mr Marray said Mr Grogan had been informed that he was to have been included in the distribution of the estate and had initially sought information only about his PAYE and PRSI contributions, which would indicate that Mr Grogan had seen himself as an employee of the deceased and that his claim was a monetary one.
He said that at no time prior to the eve of the auction had Mr Grogan indicated his intention to take legal action seeking a proprietary interest in, or title to, all of the lands.
Ms Nerney said that the 23 acres to be sold were the closest to Mr Grogan's original family homestead and would be the most convenient to be annexed to his home. She said that when Mr Grogan's claim came for trial he would be seeking a declaration from the court that he was entitled to the lands or such portion of them as the court deemed reasonable.
Mr Justice Butler, refusing to restrain today's auction, said that he had no doubt but that there was a case to be tried, but what case was the crucial issue.
To succeed, Mr Grogan would have to establish a case in relation to the actual passing of title to him. It seemed it would be highly unlikely that terms like "you will be looked after" and "you will get the lands" would be translated by a court into a movement of title of the land.
Mr Justice Butler said that, from a balance-of-justice point of view, damage caused by stopping today's auction would far outweigh the damage which would be done to Mr Grogan by allowing part of the lands to be sold.
The court had been told that the remaining 95 acres would not be sold until the determination of Mr Grogan's claim.