Nanny loses court case against singer
Ms Fahy failed in her claim for a £10,000 severance payment and got just €1,500 concerning alleged damage to personal items.
Ms Fahy also failed in her claims that she was to receive £500 per week, as well as a new Cherokee jeep which she said was promised to her in the event her verbal contract was terminated.
While a decision on costs will not be made by Mr Justice Jonathan Quirke until tomorrow, Ms Fahy could face a substantial bill for costs, as lawyers for Ms O’Riordan and Mr Burton submitted they should be entitled to costs on the High Court scale.
If the judge allows High Court costs, Ms Fahy could face a bill of €300,000. An appeal could cost her €100,000. Lawyers for Ms Fahy are likely to oppose any application for High Court costs.
The judge said he was satisfied on the evidence that Ms O’Riordan and Mr Burton were deeply devoted to their son Taylor who was a baby at the time of the claimed incidents in 1999 (they since have a second child, Molly).
They were described by Mr Justice Quirke as exemplary and caring parents. He also said he was satisfied on the evidence that Ms Fahy was a qualified, competent and caring childminder.
The judge said it was difficult to reconcile the testimony of Ms Fahy with that of Ms O’Riordan and her husband and their mothers, Eileen O’Riordan and Eleanor Murdoch. But he said certain facts which had been proved were not in dispute.
Mr Justice Quirke said the fact that the parties had different recollections of events of five years ago was not surprising. It did not necessarily mean that any of the witnesses were being deliberately deceitful and dishonest.
The judge said recourse to the courts should be a last resort, particularly when family circumstances and the care and welfare of children were involved.
He said differences had arisen between Ms Fahy and the defendants when they were in Canada on July 1, 1999. Some two weeks later, before the defendants had returned to Ireland, Ms Fahy had issued High Court proceedings.
Ms Fahy sued the defendants for breach of contract, negligence and breach of duty. She also sued both defendants for alleged false imprisonment but during the hearing it was indicated that claim was not proceeding against Ms O’Riordan but against her husband only.
After the judgment Ms Fahy said she did not regret taking the action and it was always going to be a difficult case for her to prove.
Ms O’Riordan said she was relieved the case was over while her husband said he felt “totally vindicated” by the judgment.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
