A Kerry-based financial services company "crashed red light after red light in a craven chase for easy profit", it was alleged yesterday.

Fexco (Ireland), which operates an international business from Killorglin, issued bogus invoices and false returns, and made arrangements which were fraudulent and in breach of the law, it was claimed at the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Tralee.

The company, which processes tourist VAT returns and handles the State prize bonds, was accused of issuing bogus invoices in the context of claiming grants, and of making false returns to the Central Bank. The hearing at Tralee court house was also told that senior figures in the company received income payments in cash.

The catalogue of allegations was listed by senior counsel Dr John O'Mahony as he opened the case of his client, Mr Conor O'Mahony, Annadale Road, Killorglin, who is claiming unfair dismissal by Fexco.

An employee of the company for the past 10 years and a company director, Mr O'Mahony was the head of the Fexco international payments division when he was dismissed on foot of a unanimous board decision on January 20th last. He remains a director and a shareholder.

Fexco has accused Mr O'Mahony of setting up bogus or fictitious share-dealing accounts involving members of staff, his friends and outsiders. The account, based in New York, was in the name of James Peabody, of Park Avenue, New York.

Fexco has also alleged that Mr O'Mahony used company funds on a number of occasions. These include a £20,000 investment in shares in Lloyds and £64,000 to buy an apartment in Spain.

The opening submissions by Dr O'Mahony were dismissed as "wild allegations" by Fexco senior counsel, Mr Ercus Stewart. He said the claims were unfounded and denied.

Mr Stewart had warned tribunal chairman Mr Peter O'Leary that he would hear "loads of allegations" concerning people outside the company and fellow workers.

Several attempts had been made on Monday and Tuesday of this week to reach a settlement without going into a public hearing. Fexco also sought unsuccessfully to have the hearing conducted in camera.

Mr Stewart told the tribunal that Mr O'Mahony had very important obligations of trust and confidence to the company and that he had authority to sign cheques.

"Its the company's case that the reason he has been dismissed is that he set up bogus or fictitious share dealing," Mr Stewart said. "Mr O'Mahony will claim he didn't break any laws, but the bond of trust with his employer has been broken and the dismissal is justified," Mr Stewart added.

Mr Stewart said that fair procedures were followed and natural justice was complied with.

Mr Stewart said another person, later identified in the hearing as Mr Brian Murphy, who headed up the Fexco stockbroking division, had also been investigated.

Mr Murphy resigned on December 9th last as director of one of the companies in the group and remained in employment. The career path of former banker, Mr O'Mahony, before he was head-hunted by Fexco to handle its prize bond account was outlined in detail by Dr O'Mahony.

Dr O'Mahony said his client was an assistant manager with AIB in 1989 when Fexco chairman, Mr Brian McCarthy, identified him as a person who would go far in his company.

The hearing heard that Mr O'Mahony headed up the prize bonds division and came into the company as general manager.

Dr O'Mahony said his client was given wide discretion. He added: "In relation to the money, Fexco isn't out a penny." His client was merely operating in a culture fostered by the company which aimed to reward people who were doing good work for Fexco.

In relation to the share transactions, Dr O'Mahony said they were carried out in a fictitious name by a syndicate. He said that, significantly, one of the people in the syndicate was the Fexco head of stockbroking, Mr Murphy. He pointed out later that Mr Murphy set up the documentation in the Peabody Account.

Dr O'Mahony said it was their case that there was no law broken, no regulations broken, no money laundering carried out and no insider trading. He said senior members of the company were members of the syndicate.

In relation to Lloyds shares, Dr O'Mahony said there was a full explanation for the matter. He said the company was reimbursed and it was par for the course in the order of business.

He conceded: "Maybe the business was conducted in a clumsy manner, but it didn't warrant the extraordinary and disproportionate course of action taken by the company."

The case was adjourned yesterday and the tribunal will resume hearing it in Limerick on January 5th next.