THE Sunday Times had been ordered to pay the £10,000 costs of an action brought by Mrs Margaret Heffernan, chairwoman of Dunnes Stores, over an article it published on March 9th this year.
The newspaper acknowledged a mistake had been made in the article and apologised in the High Court yesterday to Mrs Heffernan.
Mr Garrett Cooney SC, for Mrs Heffernan, said statements made in the article were misleading and damaging to Mrs Heffernan. There was no foundation whatsoever for the statements which, he said, constituted clear contempt.
Mr Cooney said the application arose from proceedings already before the court involving Mrs Heffernan and her brother, Mr Ben Dunne, and which related to the administration of the estate of their late sister, Ms Therese Dunne. The case had attracted considerable publicity, he said.
Giving his decision, Mr Justice Smyth said, in his view, there was no risk of prejudice resulting from the article. He did not believe that a judge who would be hearing the action alone would be influenced by it unless he was feeble minded. The mistake had been acknowledged and an apology made.
The judge accepted an undertaking from the Sunday Times that it would report court cases in future in a fair and responsible manner and awarded costs of the application, which he measured at £10,000, to Mrs Heffernan.
The judge added, however, that it was no excuse to say that simply because a person was wealthy they were devoid of any sensitivity and fair game. People, whether they were rich or poor, should be able to have their point of view determined by a tribunal.
Mr Cooney said the court report related to an article published by Mr Rory Godson in the Sunday Times on March 9th which contained a clear misinterpretation of what had already occurred in the proceedings and what the issues were. The writer had showed an attitude of extreme carelessness as to the facts of the case, said Mr Cooney.
Mr Cooney said the newspaper and the journalist were in contempt of court on the grounds that the publication was disparaging to Mrs Heffernan.
Mr Eoin McCullough, counsel for the Sunday Times, said the article was not intended as a court report, although parts of it claimed to represent what was said in court. It had been intended to be an account of a dispute between the parties.
It was important to say, said Mr McCullough, that his clients were happy and anxious to apologise for any mistake made, both to the court and to Mrs Heffernan.
Mr McCullough, however, disputed the case made by counsel for Mrs Heffernan that the article posed a real risk of prejudice to the case. Such a risk did not arise, he said, as the action was being heard by a judge only and not a jury. He also claimed that the article did not raise any real risk that Mrs Heffernan would be deterred from pursuing her right to have her case heard.
Mr McCullough also said the Sunday Times would give an undertaking to publish fair and accurate reports of court proceedings.