A former special adviser to Mr Charles Haughey yesterday secured a High Court order restraining her dismissal by her employer, who she claimed intended to terminate her contract because she may be obliged to go before the Moriarty tribunal.
Mr Justice Kearns granted the interim order to Mr Adrian Hardiman SC, for Ms Catherine Butler, executive assistant of Harbour View, Howth, against Mr Sean Mulryan and Ballymore Securities Limited, of which Mr Mulryan is managing director.
Mr Hardiman stressed the feared dismissal was prompted by the mere fact that his client may be a witness before the tribunal. There was no suggestion her own conduct was discreditable.
In an affidavit, Ms Butler said she had worked as special adviser to Mr Haughey from 1987 to 1992, during his term as Taoiseach.
She worked in a number of other capacities until March 1998, when she became assistant to Mr Mulryan. On July 22nd, she received a communication from the Moriarty tribunal notifying her she may be required to attend for interview and/or to co-operate in the tribunal's investigations into Mr Haughey's affairs. An article to similar effect appeared in the Sunday Tribune on July 11th.
Ms Butler said she advised Mr Mulryan of these facts on July 16th, 18th, 19th and 26th and also informed him on Monday last that she had a private meeting with her solicitor, Ms Caroline Preston, of A & L Goodbody & Co, to discuss the tribunal's communication.
On that day, July 26th, Ms Butler said Mr Mulryan had said: "Well, we might as well have this conversation now - I have a business to run and I have to protect my business and my reputation and if you're going to be called before Moriarty, it'll have huge implications for me - never mind reading about you in the newspapers, which was very complimentary by the way - I cannot employ you or have you associated with my company - well, not publicly anyway - so I want you to become a self-employed consultant."
Ms Butler said she was horrified by this and told Mr Mulryan that no suggestion of impropriety was being made against her. She said Mr Mulryan had responded: "I know you have done a great job for me and have helped me with [certain named projects] and [a named individual] and all that, but the fact of the matter is that you are guilty by association." She had asked what that meant and he said: "Guilty by association having worked for Haughey."
Ms Butler said Mr Mulryan had also referred to other projects and the reaction of a certain class of person to her connection with Mr Haughey and to her possible summoning before the tribunal.
It appeared to be his intention to terminate her employment because she might be obliged to meet, co-operate with or possibly give evidence to the Moriarty tribunal.
She was advised any such attempt constituted a breach of contract, intimidation and/or contempt of court in the form of reprisal against a witness.
Mr Hardiman said Ms Butler's history of employment had been set out to Mr Mulryan before her employment with him and it was clear no one in the business world would be unaware of that history.
Ms Butler had sought an undertaking she would not be dismissed but that undertaking was not forthcoming. The solicitor involved had said she only had partial instructions.