A judge hopes to rule in December on a case taken by Dana Rosemary Scallon that her sister and niece put up funds to cover costs should they lose a defamation case against her.
The defamation action against the former presidential candidate and singer arises out of a 2011 TV interview when Ms Scallon was asked about allegations of sexual abuse made against her brother John.
Susan Stein and her daughter Susan Gorrell, both living in Iowa, US, have taken separate High Court actions alleging Dana defamed them during the interview broadcast on TV3 in October 2011 during the presidential election campaign.
Dana, they claim, made statements which meant both women maliciously made up claims Ms Gorrell was sexually abused between 1971-81 by her uncle, John Brown. They claim the allegations of abuse are true.
Mr Brown (62), of Bracknell, Berkshire, England, was cleared in July 2014 of charges of indecent assault of two girls aged under 13 and 16 at several locations in Northern Ireland and England in the 1970s and 80s.
Key witness
He denied all the claims against him and also denied claims that Dana, a key witness in his defence, helped him cover up the allegations.
In her defence to the actions by Ms Stein and Ms Gorrell, Dana, of Claregalway, Co Galway, denies defamation.
She argues the sexual abuse claims against her brother John first surfaced in 2005 during a US court dispute involving members of her family, including Ms Stein and Mr Brown, concerning copyright of her records and ownership of a music company, Heartbeat Records, described as the “number one stop for Catholic product”.
Mr Justice Robert Eagar in the High Court was asked by Dana to rule that her sister and niece should put up security for costs should they lose their case, as neither of them has assets here.
‘After the event’ insurance
They opposed the application and said they have “after the event” insurance cover under which the insurer will pay out €150,000 should they lose their actions, but they will have to pay the insurer if they win.
Dana’s side argued such an arrangement is illegal here and amounts to “champerty”.
Dana’s side estimates her costs at €425,000 and the plaintiffs estimate €169,000.
Following final submissions today from both sides, after a three-day hearing, Mr Justice Eagar said he hoped to give a decision in early December.