Mr Justice Frank Murphy has described the fact that a solicitor acting for Catherine Nevin sought advice from Judge Donnchadh O Buachalla as "unusual". He was speaking during yesterday's sitting of his public inquiry into the transfer of a pub licence into the sole name of Catherine Nevin.
In questions to Mr Donnchadh Lehane, solicitor for Nevin, concerning a meeting on June 13th, 1997, in Judge O Buachalla's chambers, Mr Justice Murphy asked why he had not sought advice from a barrister instead. "To seek the advice of the judge would in my view be unusual," he said.
On his second day of evidence, Mr Lehane stressed that it was "absolutely my idea" to ask Judge O Buachalla for advice. As a result of the meeting, the judge signed an authorisation stating he had no difficulty with the granting of the licence to Nevin. However this was not sufficient for Customs and Excise in Waterford who requested a court certificate of transfer into her name.
Mr Lehane admitted he was worried that the licence had not been granted as the end of the licensing year approached, but he stressed that Nevin had "left it to me . . . I said I was looking after it". He told Mr Justice Murphy he "didn't know" why proceedings had taken place in chambers and not in open court.
Earlier responding to questions from Mr John Rogers SC, for Judge O Buachalla, Mr Lehane said he did not find the holding of another meeting in Judge O Buachalla chambers in Wexford on September 29th, 1997, at which six people were present, either surreal or peculiar and he "wouldn't be party to something like that".
As a result of the meeting, the judge signed an order deleting Tom Nevin's name from the licence. This was accepted by the Custom and Excise and the Revenue Commissioners issued an ordinary pub licence to Catherine Nevin for the year 1996/97 on the next day - the final day of the licensing year.
Mr Lehane confirmed the objection of Garda Insp Peter Finn to the application, which had been made ex-parte. However, he stressed that after the same meeting reconvened later that day, "my recollection is that Inspector Finn said he was taking no further part in the application" and the judge then signed.
Meanwhile, a court clerk told the inquiry that while the conduct of legal matters in a judge's chambers is regarded as commonplace most business is done in open court.
Ms Margaret Carroll, an assistant district clerk based in Gorey courthouse, replying to questions from Mr Rogers, said a lot of work was done in chambers but she couldn't recall a licensing case previously being handled in this way. Usually licensing matters would be mentioned in open court and if there was a problem, they would be adjourned to get documents in order.
Mr Rogers said a broad range of matters were dealt with in chambers and cited matters relating to the Department of Agriculture, the Revenue Commissioners, Garda warrants and the Garda Criminal Assets Bureau as examples. "Half a day's work can be done getting people through the room," said Mr Rogers. Mr Carroll agreed that a lot of work could be achieved this way and it was not unusual for parties to request to see the judge.
However, when Mr Rogers cited juvenile cases and family law cases, counsel for the inquiry, Mr Sean Ryan SC, said it was "potentially misleading" to equate the licensing issue with these as they had statutory provisions which enabled them to be held in camera.