A High Court judge has suggested that evidence from Mr Daniel Tully, a director of Elan, might be taken by video link because of illness.

His evidence is being sought for legal proceedings brought against the company by former Elan chairman Mr Donal Geaney.

Mr Tully lives in New York and is ill. Mr Geaney claims Mr Tully is a "critical" witness in his claim against Elan.

Mr Justice Kelly yesterday suggested that a video link to the Irish courts might be better than having "a battery of lawyers" arrive at Mr Tully's home to take his evidence by commission. Both sides are considering the suggestion and the matter returns to court next week.

Mr Geaney, a former chief executive and chairman of Elan, in his action against Elan, claims he has been denied share option entitlements (which could exceed $12 million (€9 million)).

Mr Geaney, who is also ill at present, is claiming he was given a remuneration package in November 1989 which included share options. He alleges that, following his removal from office, he had a telephone conversation with Mr Tully and with Elan chairman, Mr Garo Armen, who, he claims, confirmed that he would be treated in the same manner as other senior executives who had left or would be leaving Elan.

He claims that the agreement meant he would have 24 months from the date of termination of his employment in which to exercise his share options and that Elan, wrongfully and in breach of agreed terms, had purportedly asserted he was not entitled to exercise the share options which he held.

Elan claims that Mr Geaney's primary concern at the time of his dismissal was to be given as long a period as possible to allow the share price an opportunity to recover so that his share or stock options would have some value.

To that end, Mr Geaney was granted a new two-year employment contract with the relationship being severed at the end of that contract. At no stage, the company alleges, had any negotiations taken place in respect of extending the option exercise period post termination.

The case was adjourned a week ago to yesterday to hear an application brought on behalf of Mr Geaney to allow evidence on commission to be taken from Mr Tully.

Yesterday, Mr Marcus Dowling, for Mr Geaney, told Mr Justice Kelly that his client believed that Mr Tully was a critical witness to his claim.

Mr Justice Kelly asked if there was a possibility that the evidence from Mr Tully could be taken by way of video link rather than have everybody "decamping" to the US. Video link evidence would result in a minimum of intrusion into Mr Tully's domestic arrangements and might be preferable to having a battery of lawyers invade his house for the taking of his evidence.

The video link could be tied into Mr Tully's schedule of receiving treatment, the judge added.

The High Court in Dublin has the facilities for such a video link.

It might very well be that the judge hearing evidence might have to form a view as to the issue of credibility because of assertions in this case that something was said, Mr Justice Kelly added. The other side was going to deny such assertions were made. In such circumstances, a video link would be of assistance. If evidence were taken on commission, a judge would only have a transcript of the evidence given by Mr Tully.

Mr Justice Kelly adjourned the application for a week to allow lawyers to consider his suggestion.