Redmond says 'concealment' justifies delay in taking case

FORMER ASSISTANT Dublin city and county manager George Redmond has argued a six-year delay in pursuing his High Court action …

FORMER ASSISTANT Dublin city and county manager George Redmond has argued a six-year delay in pursuing his High Court action aimed at overturning a corruption finding against him was justified on grounds including alleged “concealment” by the planning tribunal of documents relating to the credibility of its main witness, James Gogarty.

The Flood (now Mahon) Tribunal found in its 2004 third interim report that Mr Redmond had received a corrupt payment in relation to planning matters and had also obstructed its work.

In 2005, Mr Redmond, whose subsequent conviction on a corruption finding was overturned on appeal, brought a High Court action seeking to quash the tribunal’s findings. He claimed his constitutional rights had been breached and sought damages. He also challenged a costs order made against him.

The tribunal has applied to have the action dismissed on grounds of alleged inordinate delay in prosecuting it.

READ MORE

The two-day action concluded yesterday and Mr Justice Paul Gilligan has reserved judgment.

In submissions for Mr Redmond yesterday, Hugh Hartnett SC said the balance of justice required his client’s case should be allowed continue particularly given a concession by the tribunal it should have provided another tribunal party, Joseph Murphy Structural Engineering (JMSE) Ltd, with documentation in relation to its main witness, the late James Gogarty.

That concession was made in the run-up to JMSE’s High Court challenge to an award of costs against it by the tribunal. The Supreme Court gave a decision in favour of JMSE in April 2010 following appeal, he said.

Mr Hartnett argued Mr Redmond’s delay in not taking any further steps in his proceedings between 2005 and 2010, when he had notified his intention to proceed, and a further delay of more than a year before a draft statement of claim was served, was not inordinate and inexcusable as alleged by the tribunal.

Mr Redmond was awaiting the JMSE Supreme Court decision which criticised the failure of the tribunal to provide to the JMSE directors, in advance of its dealings with them, “explosive” documentation which went to the credibility of Mr Gogarty as the main witness, counsel said.

Mr Redmond was entitled to wait for the JMSE decision because he too had not received documentation which would also have enabled him challenge the credibility of Mr Gogarty, Mr Hartnett said.

The delay could also be explained by the fact Mr Redmond had been in prison for corruption, a conviction overturned on appeal as unsafe, counsel said.

Mr Redmond did not have lawyers to advise him during this time, was overborne with material relating to his case and was advanced in years, his counsel added.

It would have been more appropriate for the tribunal to call back parties to address wrongs done against them but this was not done, counsel said. Mr Gogarty had since died and there would never be an opportunity to cross-examine him. The “concealed” documentation showed Mr Gogarty had made allegations against other third parties which would have gone against his credibility, counsel added.