Leech granted €750,000 of libel award pending appeal

COMMUNICATIONS consultant Monica Leech is to be paid €750,000 pending the outcome of an appeal by Independent Newspapers against…

COMMUNICATIONS consultant Monica Leech is to be paid €750,000 pending the outcome of an appeal by Independent Newspapers against the record €1.8 million damages award over libellous articles about her in the Evening Herald, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday.

The court also affirmed a High Court order directing she should receive €100,000 towards her legal costs pending the appeal. Independent Newspapers, publishers of the Herald, had sought a stay on a High Court decision that Ms Leech should be paid €750,000 now.

A High Court jury last month awarded €1.8 million damages to Ms Leech following its majority verdict that she was libelled in series of Heraldarticles in 2004. The jury found the articles meant Ms Leech was having an affair with then minister for the environment Martin Cullen.

Rejecting the stay application yesterday, the Chief Justice John Murray, with Mr Justice Hugh Geoghegan and Mr Justice Nial Fennelly, said the appeal only related to the amount of damages and there was no argument of a point of law.

READ MORE

The High Court judge had exercised his discretion in relation to the amount of damages which should be paid out pending appeal, he said. The Supreme Court was also satisfied Independent Newspapers had not shown Ms Leech could not repay the money if she lost at appeal stage.

Eoin McCullough SC, for Independent Newspapers, said the award was excessive and disproportionate. He argued the trial judge, Mr Justice Eamon De Valera, had wrongly directed that the minority of the jury who disagreed with the libel finding was not entitled to take part in the discussion as to the amount of damages.

Mr McCullough noted previous Supreme Court decisions set aside libel awards to €380,000 to MEP Pronsias de Rossa and €320,000 to businessman Denis O’Brien as disproportionate. He argued there was a strong possibility an appeal court would interfere with the Leech award, particularly where there was a “paucity” of evidence as to what specific losses she had suffered, Mr McCullough said. He said there was a concern, if it was paid out, it may not be possible to recover the money. If there was to be a pre-appeal payout, it should be 10 per cent – €180,000 – of the €1.8 million award, he argued.