Denis O’Brien, the Irish media magnate with a Maxwellian penchant for litigation, has come up with a wonderful wheeze to aid his legal action against Ireland’s parliament
He wants the Dublin high court to accept opinions advanced by an expert in US constitutional law.
In a pre-trial application on Thursday, as reported by the Irish Times and by RTÉ, O’Brien has asked the judge to admit into evidence a 60-page report from Laurence Tribe, a professor at Harvard Law School.
It is O’Brien’s contention that statements made by TDs (MPs) in parliament about his banking affairs do not have absolute privilege.
His counsel, Michael Cush SC, argued that Tribe’s evidence about American law was relevant and that it would be “appropriate and helpful” to consider authorities from other jurisdictions.
But lawyers acting for the Dáil committee on procedure and privileges, and for the Irish state, countered that there was no provision under which the Irish courts can hear such evidence. Tribe’s evidence had no relevance to Irish constitutional law, they said.
One of them, Maurice Collins, said that if US law was deemed to be relevant then so too could precedent from several other countries and O’Brien’s case could turn into “a constitutional convention” if such evidence were admissible.
There is “simply no US authority that could be seen to bear directly on the issues in these proceedings”, he said.
The case follows statements made in the Dáil by Social Democrat TD Catherine Murphy and Sinn Féin TD Pearse Doherty about O’Brien’s banking affairs in May and June 2015 respectively.
O’Brien claims the statements breached his rights by forcing him to concede in the high court, in June 2015, a script which he sought to prevent the broadcaster, RTÉ, publishing.
The president of the high court, Mr Justice Peter Kelly, said he would give his decision at a later date.
He refused a previous application by Cush to have the action, fixed for hearing on 29 November, heard by three judges.
