Excessive fees amounting to several million pounds were paid to lawyers representing Goodman International and Mr Larry Goodman at the Beef Tribunal, the Minister for Finance has argued before the High Court.
Mr Edmund Honohan SC said the Minister was "picking up the bill" for an exercise started by the Oireachtas. In that sense the Oireachtas was the litigant and protagonist seeking to reach the truth in so far as it could.
The court ought to have regard to the fact that the Oireachtas, though not an "ordinary" litigant, should not be penalised or treated differently from any other litigant.
If tribunals became extraordinarily expensive there would be a practical bar on the Oireachtas embarking on such exercises in the future, counsel said. The Goodman organisation originally lodged a costs bill of over £9 million but this was reduced to £7.68 million by the Taxing Master of the High Court, Mr James Flynn.
The Goodman meat group has received interim payments of about £6 million pending a final decision on the total payout.
To date the State has paid out £14.316 million in beef tribunal costs. A further £10 million was set aside last year.
Before yesterday's application by the Minister for a review of the Taxing Master's findings, Ms Justice Laffoy was told the Goodman organisation was also claiming interest on the bill of costs. That claim was adjourned until the Minister's challenge has finished.
Mr Honahan, for the Minister, said the court would be asked whether the Goodman side incurred expenses - which might be termed "luxuries" - and which ought not to be visited on his client.
There had been objections before the Taxing Master against fees sought by lawyers acting for the Goodman organisation and objections in relation to "disbursements" to experts, together with the cost of "catering".
In relation to fees for solicitors acting for the Goodman Group and Mr Goodman, the Taxing Master had decided to examine the number of work hours recorded.
The issue of export credit had taken 77 days and general issues occupied the other 150 days. There were 20 days common to both issues.
Mr Honohan said there had been no evidence before the Taxing Master about an actual bill of costs submitted by the Goodman solicitors to the Goodman Group and Mr Goodman, or that there was a legal liability to pay fees of the magnitude finally taxed. It was not unreasonable that had such a bill been submitted to the Goodman Group, the Minister should see it.
Mr Honohan argued that the rates charged by the solicitors were for work done by "partners" or "associates" in the firm, when some of that work could have been undertaken by assistant solicitors or law clerks.
Mr Honohan also objected to fees totalling £872,735, which were allowed to counsel representing the Goodman side during the 225-day hearing.
The hearing continues today.