Lawlor submits documents but claims privilege on some

The Dublin West TD, Mr Liam Lawlor, has provided the Flood tribunal with a large volume of documents, but is claiming legal privilege…

The Dublin West TD, Mr Liam Lawlor, has provided the Flood tribunal with a large volume of documents, but is claiming legal privilege over some others, the High Court was told yesterday.

Counsel for the tribunal told Mr Justice Smyth its lawyers needed more time to examine the documents. The judge put the case back to July 3rd to allow that. The tribunal team will also consider whether it needs further evidence from Mr Lawlor. An update on the situation will be given to the court on July 3rd.

The judge was told that, from a cursory check of the documents, the privilege claim over some appeared to be in order. The documents for which privilege was claimed are understood to relate to contacts between Mr Lawlor and his lawyers.

Mr Lawlor was jailed for seven days in January for failing to co-operate with the tribunal in providing various financial records. He was also fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs estimated at close to £200,000. A sentence of three months was imposed but all except seven days of it was suspended.

READ MORE

When the case came before the High Court in early April, Mr Justice Smyth heard that certain documents required by the tribunal were outstanding, and the matter was adjourned. It was stated on behalf of the tribunal that, while the documents outstanding were not in Mr Lawlor's possession, they were in his power of procurement.

To the best of the lawyers' knowledge, those documents related to a Liechtenstein bank, the Czech Republic, the Bank of Ireland and Revenue Commissioners sources.

Yesterday Mr Frank Clarke SC, for the tribunal, said a full affidavit which claimed to comply with the court order had been provided, except for the area over which privilege was being claimed.

Counsel said the tribunal team needed time to consider if the privilege issue needed to be dealt with and to review the voluminous set of documents, to satisfy itself that there had been compliance with the order. Time was also needed to consider whether Mr Lawlor needed to give further evidence.

Mr Lawlor was in court and was represented by Mr Timothy Sheehan.