The chairman of the planning tribunal will decide next week whether to postpone hearings involving the main witness, Mr James Gogarty, as demanded by several parties.
Lawyers representing the two builders who feature in Mr Gogarty's affidavit, Mr Michael Bailey and Mr Joseph Murphy Snr, said yesterday they would go to the High Court if Mr Justice Flood did not accede to their request. Counsel for the former minister for foreign affairs, Mr Ray Burke, said he might also seek an adjournment.
With Mr Gogarty now aged 81, the tribunal was anxious to press ahead with an early hearing of his evidence, even if this discommoded other parties. But the combined opposition of at least five teams at the tribunal now makes this highly unlikely.
If Mr Justice Flood goes ahead with Mr Gogarty's evidence as planned on November 16th, the issue will end up in the High Court. If he does not, a delay of several months - at the minimum - is possible.
Mr Gogarty, a former senior executive of Joseph Murphy Structural Engineering, made a detailed statement of his allegation last month. Newspaper reports of his original allegations led to the establishment of the tribunal and the resignation of Mr Burke.
At yesterday's hearing, Mr Garret Cooney SC, for JMSE Ltd and associated companies, their directors and families, said that Mr Gogarty's affidavit had not been furnished to his clients until October 20th. It purported to deal with events covering 30 years since Mr Gogarty joined JMSE in 1968. It contained the most serious charges, including allegations of criminal offences, against his clients.
The time allowed to provide a defence against these charges before the hearing of Mr Gogarty's evidence was not adequate, he said. It would be "fundamentally unfair" to allow the hearing proceed at the expense of his clients.
Mr Cooney also said his clients had not been informed of the procedures to be followed at the planned hearing. Would the tribunal be making available the statements made by Mr Gogarty to the Garda, so these could be compared to his affidavit, he asked.
Mr Cooney said if this information was not provided, he would have no alternative but to "seek a remedy elsewhere". Later, he said he would go the High Court if the information was not forthcoming.
He also asked for details of any negotiations which might have taken place between Mr Gogarty and the tribunal's legal team, as well as the instructions taken by Mr Gogarty's solicitors.
Mr Colm Allen SC, for Mr Michael Bailey and Bovale Developments Ltd, echoed the complaints about the "woefully inadequate" amount of time there was to examine the affidavit. The parties he represented had not been furnished with all the matters relied upon in Mr Gogarty's affidavit, such as planning permissions, documents relating to lands and pensions. They would require "sight" of these documents before being able to proceed.
For Mr Gogarty, Mr Brian O'Moore said counsel for Mr Bailey and Mr Murphy had chosen an "outrageously unfair" way to make an application for an adjournment.
It was "refreshing" that at the age of 81 Mr Gogarty had produced a statement, in contrast to other parties.
Earlier, Mr Justice Flood granted limited representation to Mr Thomas Bailey, a brother of Mr Michael Bailey, who was also served with Mr Gogarty's affidavit last month. Limited representation was also extended to Mr Marcus Sweeney, Mr George Redmond, Mr Gerard Downes and the Garda Siochana.
The tribunal was adjourned until Tuesday at noon.
