A BARRISTER has told the High Court that his builder client will claim he paid £2,000 in cash in 1994 to a financial consultant and it was represented that the money would go to Mr Bertie Ahern's election fund.
The suggestion was put by Mr Brendan Gogarty when cross-examining Mr Ronald J. Bergin, an engineer, of Annefield, Taney Road, Dundrum, Co Dublin. Mr Bergin described it as "an outrageous suggestion".
The matter was put during an action over the alleged involvement of Mr Bergin and a financial consultant, Mr Roderick Brennan, of Coolfore, Ashbourne, Co Meath, in providing financial and planning services in Co Meath.
They are suing Mr James Robert Farrell, a builder, of Rockfield Road, Kells, Co Meath, and Farrell Homes (Kells) Development Ltd, also of Rockfield Road.
During the cross-examination of Mr Bergin by Mr Gogarty, for the defendants, counsel said Mr Farrell would say that he paid £2,000 cash in 1994 to Mr Brennan, in the presence of Mr Bergin, and that it was represented to Mr Farrell that the £2,000 was for Mr Ahern's election fund.
In the hearing before Ms Justice Carroll, the plaintiffs claim that in November 1991 Mr Brennan was approached by the defendants, their servants or agents with a view to providing financial direction and advice. Planning applications were necessary and the services of Mr Bergin were retained.
They claim it was agreed they would be paid once planning permission had been obtained for the defendants' properties.
It is also claimed that between 1991 and 1997, the plaintiffs discharged considerable financial and planning services for the defendants, their servants or agents at properties owned by the defendants at Headford Place, Kells; Lloyds, Oldcastle Road, Kells; and Balreask, Navan.
It was an alleged express term of the contract between the sides that payments would be made by the defendants from proceeds arising from the enhanced value of the lands and business.
It is claimed that on May 21st, 1992, Mr Farrell agreed to sell Mr Bergin and Mr Brennan four detached sites at Lloyd for £15,000. This reduced sum was agreed so as to reflect works done and services rendered.
It is also claimed that on January 25th, 1994, the plaintiffs, in consideration for works done to achieve rezoning at Lloyd, were furnished with a letter of undertaking granting them one house each in discharge of fees due and owing to them. This letter was to give the plaintiffs one-half of the profits of the development of the project, subsequent to the plaintiffs contributing £20,000 each towards the development.
Mr Bergin and Mr Brennan claim that on May 27th, 1995, the defendants, their servants or agents, as consideration for works done and services rendered, agreed to pay them a sum equivalent to 10 per cent of the proceeds of the lands at Balreask. It is claimed lands at Balreask were eventually sold for more than £2 million in 1998.
It is also claimed that on August 13th, 1995, the defendants agreed by an irrevocable letter of authorisation to the plaintiffs to finance the construction and sale of two houses at Headford Place.
It is alleged that despite continued works and services rendered up to the end of August 1997, the defendants failed to honour obligations pursuant to the agreements.
Among reliefs being sought by the plaintiffs is a declaration that they are entitled to a 10 per cent share of the proceeds of the Balreask sale. They are also seeking damages.
The hearing continues.