The Canadian-born husband of Cranberries singer Dolores O'Riordan admitted in the High Court yesterday that he and his wife had retained a private investigator to look into their former nanny.
Mr Don Burton rejected a suggestion from a barrister representing Ms Joy Fahy that he came from the "Wyatt Earp school of industrial relations".
Mr Burton was being cross-examined on the sixth day of the action brought by Ms Fahy, former nanny to the Burton's son, Taylor, against the Burtons for alleged breach of contract and, in Mr Burton's case only, false imprisonment.
Ms Fahy (34), of Moyleggan, Batterstown, Co Meath, had worked with the Burtons as a childminder for a short time in mid-1999.
Under cross-examination by Mr Richard Keane SC, for Ms Fahy, Mr Burton said they had retained a private investigator for a couple of days to investigate Ms Fahy's character as "she was accusing us of everything".
Mr Keane suggested that employing a private investigator to look at Ms Fahy's character culminated in a savage attack on her integrity. Counsel suggested that Mr Burton had attacked Ms Fahy on the basis that she had notions of herself over and above her station and was nothing more than a second-string personal assistant employed on a three-month contract.
Mr Burton said: "That is what you are saying." He denied that he had tried to present her as being dishonest.
Counsel put it to Mr Burton that he seemed to enjoy a "cowboy image" and that he kept western horses and wore a Stetson on occasions. What was wrong with that? Mr Burton responded.
Mr Keane said that Mr Burton seemed to come from the "Wyatt Earp school of industrial relations". Mr Burton said that was untrue.
Asked by Mr Keane how many people Mr Burton had fired over the years, Mr Burton said people came and went all the time.
Asked how many times he had been in court, Mr Burton said he had been in court for traffic incidents. He had been in court once in Ireland, when he took an individual to court over a conservatory building. There had been a case at an employment tribunal over the dismissal of a farm-hand which arose after a farm manager had let somebody go.
People "get sued all the time in the record industry", Mr Burton said. He said he accepted that Ms Fahy was very highly regarded and he accepted she was good at her job. He had never said there was anything wrong. He did not dismiss her. She had come to their employment on a trial basis.
Every employee was taken on on a three-month contract, he said. It was a safety precaution for the band. It was the same on tour and on the farm if there were people showing up late or tired or with too much drink.
In this country one had to give several warnings before people were let go, he said. He had never had a problem hiring anybody on tour on a three-month basis.
Earlier, Mr Keane suggested that, from the evidence, Mr Burton was a man who enjoyed the trappings and the associated power the success of his wife Dolores had brought. Counsel suggested that being on "Team A" made him feel powerful.
Mr Burton said he enjoyed working for himself. He was self-employed. Counsel suggested that his employment emanated from the success of Dolores and the Cranberries and asked what he meant by saying he was the head and leader of the Burton household.
Mr Keane said that Dolores was a big rock star generating massive income. Mr Burton replied that he was talking about the household in terms of his wife and child.
Mr Burton agreed he was not the primary breadwinner and he also agreed that Dolores was extremely generous. He agreed that the Cranberries were a very substantial employer and that, as a direct result of Dolores's success, many people were employed.
When counsel suggested that Dolores should be the leader of the house, Mr Burton said: "That is your opinion." Mr Keane said it seemed to give Mr Burton great pleasure to be on "Team A". Mr Burton said that having "Group A" and "Group B" did not mean one was better that the other. Nobody got more than the other.
Questioned on the agreed wage for Ms Fahy, Mr Burton said she was happy with the £500 per week along with a vehicle, her accommodation and provision for her horse. He said it was untrue that she complained at one stage about the money. He denied he got angry when she had raised the issue and rejected a suggestion there was any promise of £10,000 as a severance payment.
Mr Burton also rejected a suggestion that his drinking made him behave unreasonably towards the plaintiff.
The hearing continues today.