Revenue inspectors seek access to papers

ACCESS to all documents gathered by the Government inspectors into the affairs of Ansbacher Cayman is being sought by the Revenue Commissioners and the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the High Court heard yesterday.

It is the “firm intention’’ of the Minister for Justice to seek from parties identified in the Ansbacher Cayman report the multi-million euro costs of the inspectors’ investigation, the president of the High Court, Mr Justice Finnegan, was also told. He gave leave to bring a motion on the costs issue in two weeks’ time.

Mr Justice Finnegan also decided that all documents gathered by the inspectors are to be indexed into privileged and non-privileged material and will be held by the Courts Service.

Any persons seeking access to any of this material must apply to the High Court and must advertise their intention to apply in advance, by means yet to be decided, he said.

This would enable parties with an interest in the material sought to be put on notice on the application.

Both the Director of Corporate Enforcement and the Revenue Commissioners, through counsel, said they would be seeking access to documents. Eoghan Fitzsimons SC, for the Director, said they would be seeking access to all documents, including those not included in the inspector’s report and suggested a motion should be brought to that effect. Counsel said there may have been people who were investigated but not included in the report.

James Connolly SC, for the Revenue, said his clients are under a severe financial disability because of the way the affairs of Ansbacher Cayman had been operated. He also wanted access to the documents.

Shane Murphy SC, for the inspectors, said this was a new area and the inspectors were concerned that the

issues arising may be of broader application. The Attorney General should be involved in order to deal with any public interest issues that might arise.

On the issue of costs of the Ansbacher investigation, Gerard Hogan SC, for the Minister for Justice, said that while the minister was liable for the costs of the investigation, the he intended to seek those costs from the parties involved.

Mr Justice Finnegan, said the minister could bring a motion related to the costs issue in two weeks’ time.

The judge said the matter was complex and there was an issue whether there was power under the Companies Acts to make a costs order against individuals rather than corporate bodies.