Proceedings adjourned after `insolent remark'

The Planning and Payments Tribunal was adjourned abruptly yesterday after the chairman said he would rise and not sit again until he received an apology from Mr Garrett Cooney SC.

The angry exchange came as Mr Cooney sought to introduce a document which he said indicated discrepancies in the evidence of the tribunal's chief witness, Mr James Gogarty.

After a discussion in which Mr Cooney complained of being constantly interrupted in his cross-examination, Mr Cooney asked: "What is going on here? Are you going to give us a chance to defend ourselves at this tribunal?"

But Mr Justice Flood retorted: "Mr Cooney - that is an insulting and an insolent remark from you, consistent with your conduct to date by yourself in this tribunal."

"It is well justified, Mr Chairman, by the discriminatory and combative attitude received at this tribunal since the beginning," interrupted Mr Cooney.

The judge said he was adjourning proceedings "until such time as you take care to apologise".

The exchange was the culmination of increasingly tense remarks which had begun earlier when Mr Cooney took exception to what he insisted were rambling answers provided by Mr Gogarty.

After one such lengthy answer in which Mr Gogarty repeated an allegation that Mr Joe Murphy jnr had been charged with assault, Mr Cooney said: "Mr Chairman, for the last four to five weeks Mr Gogarty has used his position in the witness box to blackguard my clients with that inference.

"This must stop, Mr Chairman. It offends against all the elementary rules of fairness and justice that a witness should take advantage of his position in a witness box to constantly blackguard people who are here in this hall."

Mr Justice Flood suggested they proceed. When Mr Cooney continued to protest, he added: "Mr Cooney, let me be quite clear about this. Anything that has happened to your clients in the course of this tribunal, if it is not justified, will be clearly denounced in the report."

Mr Cooney protested: "Mr Chairman, I don't know how concerned you are with the dignity of these proceedings but could I respectfully suggest that the witness's answers are simply not consistent with the dignity of these proceedings or elementary justice to my client. And I respectfully suggest, Mr Chairman, that the time has come now that you impose the threat at least of a serious sanction of this witness unless he answers the questions.

"So far in my cross-examination, Mr Chairman, we have been dealing with preliminary matters, I now come to the heart of my client's case, and I am entitled to a proper, sensible, fair answer to my questions and no more of this rubbish."

Mr Cooney said he must "respectfully insist on that and if this continues, Mr Chairman, I'll seek a remedy elsewhere".

At this point Mr Frank Callanan SC, for Mr Gogarty, interrupted to say that he felt there "is no point in Mr Cooney throwing a tantrum every time he doesn't get the answer he wants from the witness".

Mr Justice Flood then ruled that he would "decide how this tribunal will be run". He said he was doing his best with a difficult witness and he would not be directed by Mr Cooney, "and if you want to go to the High Court, Mr Cooney, you are welcome to go now".

Mr Cooney then attempted to put to Mr Gogarty the draft document which was prepared by his former solicitors but Mr Callanan objected that it was clearly a draft.

After Mr Justice Flood rose, the clerk of the tribunal announced that the tribunal would adjourn until 10 a.m. today.