Welfare official ‘let AIB investigator access private files’

An employee of the Department of Social Protection allegedly gave personal information about an unemployed construction worker to a private investigator working for AIB, it has been claimed before the High Court.

David Lannon, Cope View, Deepford, Drogheda, claims somebody in the department allegedly gave the investigator unauthorised access to his private and confidential files.

Mr Lannon is in dispute with the bank and a case involving both parties is pending before the Circuit Court, the High Court heard.

Another case, currently before the District Court, has been brought against the investigator and currently stands adjourned, it was also stated.

In his separate High Court proceedings against the department, Mr Lannon claims the alleged action of the department’s employee breaches his rights under the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

He has reported the matter to the Data Protection Commissioner and the department, he said.

At the High Court yesterday, Mr Justice Paul Gilligan granted Mr Lannon permission, on an ex-parte basis (one side represented only), to serve short notice of injunction proceedings on the minister for social protection.

The case will come back before the court next week.

In a sworn statement supporting his application, Mr Lannon said, arising out of his complaint to the department made in February 2015, he is aware an employee has been suspended on full pay. An internal investigation is under way, he said.

After contacting the department to check on the progress of that investigation, he was told such investigations take time and he would be informed as soon as the probe is completed, he said.

He said he fears AIB’s action against him will be completed before he can complete his action against the minister.

Because of his unhappiness with progress in the matter, he had no option but to come to court seeking various orders, he said.

In his proceedings, Mr Lannon wants orders compelling the minister to identify the person whom he alleges handed over information to the investigator.

He also seeks an injunction preventing deletion of any material from the unnamed employee’s work and home computers or the department’s main frame computer and permitting him inspect those devices and any other system the employee had access to in their daily duties.