Counsel for Mr Ian Bailey, Mr James Duggan, sought his costs against the newspapers, citing their behaviour during the case.
He said one of the suggestions was that a body of information had been made available to the newspapers by the Garda Síochána. "They were able to produce a diary," he said.
Judge Moran said: "I made an order on the first day that gave the defendants access to all the documents. I said at the start of the case it was not a murder trial. I don't want to turn it at this stage into an inquiry into the actions of the gardaí."
"I had no access to my own private diaries to which they had access," Mr Duggan said.
"They were your client's diaries and he must have known what was in them," Judge Moran said.
Mr Duggan said that his solicitor had applied twice in the District Court for the return of the diaries and was refused.
"All the guards \ were here for the trial. It is absolutely clear there was collusion," he said.
"I don't recall seeing the guards handing anything to the defence team or anything like that," Judge Moran said.
Mr Duggan repeated that he was satisfied there was collusion between the Garda Síochána and the newspapers. "They knew and were given information about what was in documents in the possession of the gardaí."
Judge Moran told him he could make a complaint if he wished.
Mr Duggan said that the claims were all fought commonly, with one set of counsel.
"They had three solicitors, they could have had one," he said.
Mr Paul Gallagher, for the newspapers, pointed out that there were four sets of solicitors in the five cases that were won. "The issues were not identical," he said. "They had separate interests to consider. Wisely, they chose to have one set of counsel."