Mahon Tribunal: Millionaire property developers Michael and Tom Bailey and related parties are seeking to have the State pay their costs, estimated at well over one million euro, of appearing before the Mahon tribunal into certain planning and payments matters. Mary Carolan reports.
Mr Des O'Neill SC, for the tribunal, said yesterday that, given the tribunal's findings that Mr Michael Bailey made corrupt payments to former Fianna Fáil minister Mr Ray Burke and former planning official Mr George Redmond, and that both Bailey brothers, and Tom Bailey's wife Caroline, hindered and obstructed the tribunal's work, they should be awarded zero costs.
After hearing submissions from Mr O'Neill and on behalf of the Baileys, tribunal chairman Judge Alan Mahon said he would give his decision as soon as possible, probably in October.
In his submissions, Mr O'Neill read extensively from a series of findings regarding the Baileys made by former tribunal chairman Mr Justice Flood in two interim reports.
These included findings that Mr Michael Bailey had denied making payments to Mr Burke and Mr Redmond, and had made false allegations against Mr James Gogarty.
Had Mr Michael Bailey told the truth to the tribunal from the start, the relevant module of the tribunal would have been much shorter, Mr O'Neill said.
He also expressed concern that the costs application was being used for "an improper purpose" - to air concerns about the findings of the tribunal regarding the Baileys when those same findings could have been challenged by the Baileys in the High Court.
Mr Colm Allen SC, for the Baileys, said his clients rejected "out of hand" the tribunal's findings regarding them, and also denied their conduct had prolonged the tribunal and impeded its progress.
His clients were caught in a "vicious and venomous" dispute between builder Mr Joseph Murphy snr and his companies and Mr James Gogarty, Mr Allen argued.
Most of the Gogarty module of the tribunal was "the equivalent of a Roman circus with Mr Gogarty being wheeled in and my clients being flung to him, he being the lion and we being the Christians".
The "latitude" afforded by the tribunal to the Gogarty legal team was "disgraceful" and much of the costs were as a result of the tribunal's own inefficiencies, Mr Allen added.
Last July, Judge Mahon ruled he had discretion regarding whether costs should be awarded to 19 parties found to have hindered, obstructed or failed to co-operate with the tribunal. When deciding costs issues, he said he would take into account several factors, including the extent of non-cooperation with the tribunal and the personal circumstances of the parties seeking costs.
Despite that ruling being challenged in the High Court, Judge Mahon has decided he will proceed with the costs issues.
Mr Allen, for Michael, Tom and Caroline Bailey and the Baileys' company, Bovale Developments Limited (which made profits of €55.3 million in the year to July 2003), argued yesterday that Judge Mahon had no jurisdiction to award costs of proceedings heard by Mr Justice Flood and should make no costs determinations prior to the High Court's judgment on the jurisdictional point.
Without prejudice to those submissions, Mr Allen applied for his clients' costs of some 118 days before the tribunal.
His side was content to have costs similar to those paid to the tribunal's legal team, counsel added.