The High Court has reserved judgment on an application by the secretary of the former manager of the Aga Khan stud in Co Kildare to restrain her dismissal.
Ms Justice Laffoy will deliver judgment on Tuesday on the application by Ms Mary Charlton for an interlocutory injunction restraining her dismissal pending the hearing of her action against the Aga Khan's representatives.
Ms Charlton is also seeking an order restraining the holding of an inquiry into matters arising from the termination of the employment of a French national, Mr Drion, as manager of the stud.
Ms Charlton (54), of Canalway, Kilcullen, Co Kildare, claims she was secretary to Mr Drion, who was stud manager for 27 years until June 1998, when his employment was terminated after an investigation. She said the termination of Mr Drion's employment came amid allegations of the unauthorised use by him of the Aga Khan's stud resources and property.
On July 28th last, she alleged that the current personnel manager and former head of security at the stud, Mr Frank Faughnan, had outlined serious allegations against her which would be made at an inquiry concerning the period of Mr Drion's management.
Mr Drion had allegedly maintained up to 40 horses apparently at the expense of the Aga Khan. Ms Charlton claimed this could not have gone unnoticed by Mr Faughnan as head of security.
Mr Faughnan was a former Army sergeant who had been employed as head of security following the disappearance of dual Derby winner, Shergar. He was later made personnel manager.
Yesterday, Mr Roddy Horan, for Mr Faughnan, said Ms Charlton was not a loyal employee and should have brought to the attention of the manager, and possibly gardai, matters which she believed were prevailing at the stud.
If the court took the view that the decision to hold an inquiry into Ms Charlton's future, presided over by Mr Faughnan, was an unhappy one, the judge could decide to postpone that investigation until after the trial of the action. This would cause no prejudice to Ms Charlton.
Mr Ercus Stewart SC, for Ms Charlton, said his client had never said or alleged that Mr Drion was a crook. But if Mr Drion had been engaged in wrongdoing, then Mr Faughnan, as head of security at the time, must have been complicit in it. Ms Charlton did not judge Mr Faughnan and did not want Mr Faughnan to sit on judgment on her. His client was perfectly willing to go before an impartial inquiry.