Strong opposition to Mr Charles Haughey being awarded his legal costs out of the public purse is expected to be expressed next month by the barrister representing the public interest, Mr Edward Comyn SC. Mr Comyn is expected to argue that the former Taoiseach Me Mr Haughey may also have a percentage of the legal costs of other witnesses awarded against him, due to his initial failure to co-operate with the tribunal, according to a well-placed source.
Mr Michael Lowry is also unlikely to be awarded all his legal costs.
The matter of legal costs incurred by parties during the Dunnes Payments Tribunal is expected to be dealt with at a brief sitting of the tribunal next month.
Any party represented at the tribunal may apply for their costs to be met by the State. Costs would usually be awarded to any witness called to give evidence at a public tribunal of inquiry.
However, Mr Justice McCracken has the option of refusing to award costs to certain witnesses if it is felt they acted wrongly or failed to co-operate with the tribunal.
Mr Haughey was represented by two senior counsel, two junior counsel and a firm of solicitors. Mr Lowry was advised by one senior counsel and one junior counsel, but gave evidence over a number of days.
Mr Lowry's total legal bill could be as high as £100,000. However, in contrast to Mr Haughey, he co-operated fully with the tribunal, making a full statement. The appointment of Mr Comyn as counsel for the public interest was largely intended to keep the costs to the taxpayer in check. The total bill to the taxpayer is not known, but it will be significantly less than the Beef Tribunal.
Much of the work conducted by lawyers for the Dunnes Payments Tribunal was conducted on non-sitting days and the level of fees was much lower than those set for the Beef Tribunal.
However, employees from a number of banks and other financial institutions gave evidence to the Dunnes Payments Tribunal.