A night-club owner, Mr John Reynolds, has been granted a High Court order preventing publication of an article about him in a new magazine, Patrick, edited by the former Irish Press solicitor, Mr Elio Malocco.
Mr Reynolds, who operates the POD and Red Box night-clubs in Dublin, secured a temporary order last week preventing publication of the article.
Mr Justice Kelly yesterday granted an interlocutory injunction preventing publication pending a full hearing of proceedings taken by Mr Reynolds against the magazine. The judge also awarded costs against Mr Malocco.
The injunction prevents Mr Malocco and other defendants or anyone with notice of the order from publishing an article entitled, "Operation Night-Cap Causes John Reynolds Sleepless Nights As Cops Raid NightClub", or any matter contained in it which is defamatory of Mr Reynolds.
The named defendants were Mr Elio Malocco, trading as Patrick; Declan Murray, Frank White, Peter Laur and Fanville Ltd.
In his decision, Mr Justice Kelly said Mr Malocco described himself as a journalist and was described in the magazine as its editor.
Declan Murray had no existence but was the first of the two purported authors of the article, he said. At the hearing, it emerged the name Declan Murray was a pseudonym for Mr Malocco. Frank White had no existence even though he purported to be the second author of the article. The name Frank White was a pseudonym for a man called Luciano Magliocco, a relation of Mr Molocco.
Little information was available as to Peter Laur. He was described in the magazine as publisher, with an address given as "London" and was also described as "the boss". Mr Laur's address in the summons was Foxrock Post Office. It emerged during the hearing that a company called Fanville Ltd held itself out to be publisher and owner of the magazine.
Mr Justice Kelly said Mr Reynolds had complained that extracts in the article defamed him in two respects. He said the words in their natural and ordinary meaning or by innuendo alleged he had been charged with permitting the sale of drugs in his night-clubs and/or that he permitted the sale of drugs on the premises. Alternatively, Mr Reynolds said the words meant he was turning a blind eye to the sale of drugs on his premises; and that he was a homosexual.
The judge said Mr Malocco contended that, insofar as the first complaint was concerned, the words did not bear the meanings ascribed to them. If they did, Mr Malocco had said he would plead justification at the trial of the action.
Insofar as the second complaint was concerned, Mr Malocco said the words did not bear the meaning contended for. He had stated in open court that Mr Reynolds was not a homosexual, nor did he ever intend to allege such.
Dealing with the drug-dealing allegations, Mr Justice Kelly said he noted that Mr Reynolds accepted that he, together with 19 night-club operators, had received notification from police concerning drug activity and conduct relating to drugs on his club premises.
The judge said Mr Malocco contended that in their natural and ordinary meaning the words in question did not allege any criminal activity on the part of Mr Reynolds. In that regard, the judge said, he believed Mr Malocco was correct.
Mr Justice Kelly said that even if he was wrong on that and the words did in their natural and ordinary meaning make such allegations, they certainly did not do so with the degree of clarity required to enable the judge to say the words were without doubt defamatory of and concerning Mr Reynolds.
Mr Justice Kelly said he had concluded that, in parts of the article, there was an innuendo to the effect contended for by Mr Reynolds.