DÁIL PRIVILEGE ROW: 

A High Court Judge stated it was never his intention that an injunction preventing RTÉ from reporting on businessman Denis O’Brien’s personal finances would restrict media outlets from fairly reporting on comments made in the Dail.

Mr Justice Donald Binchy spoke after RTÉ and The Irish Times newspaper returned to the court seeking clarification on an injunction granted last month preventing RTÉ broadcasting a report relating to Mr O’Brien’s private and confidential banking affairs with Irish Banking Resolution Corporation.

Both media outlets said the clarification related to their desire to publish comments made in the Dáil last week by Independent TD Catherine Murphy about Mr O’Brien’s alleged banking arrangements with IBRC, formerly Anglo Irish Bank.

Michael Cush SC, for Mr O’Brien, told the court his client was seeking a variation of the order to allow Ms Murphy’s comments on May 28, the accuracy of which Mr O’Brien disputes, to the Dáil be published.

DISCOVER MORE CONTENT LIKE THIS

It was never his client’s intention to stop Ms Murphy from making comments in the Dáil and it was accepted under Article 15 of the Irish Constitution all comments in the Dáil had full privilege.

After Ms Murphy, who was unhappy that Mr O’Brein was successful in his application for an injunction against RTÉ, spoke in the Dáil, reports were published on Oireachtas Televsion, on social media, and in foreign media outlets, counsel said.

This put the matter in the public domain, counsel said.

Mr Cush said Ms Murphy’s speech was “in flagrant breach” and “in conscious disregard” of Standing Order 57 of the Houses of the Oireachtas by making comments on something that was before the courts.

Under order 57, said Mr Cush, an elected member could not raise a matter in the Dail in such an overt manner so that it appears to be an attempt by the Dáil to encroach on the functions of the courts or a judicial tribunal.

Mr Cush said his client intended to bring proceedings against the State seeking clarification on the demarcation between the roles of the Oireachtas and the courts.

David Holland SC, for RTÉ, said his client welcomed Mr O’Brien’s decision to seek the variation of the injunction. However, it was RTÉ’s position that the variation did not go far enough, given that comments in the Dail about the matter may be made in the future.

He also said that, following Ms Murphy’s comments to the Dail, a number of media outlets received letters from Mr O’Brien’s solicitors saying publishing the statement would breach the injunction.

He described the decision by Mr O’Brien to seek to vary the order as a “spectacular climbdown”.

Mr Justice Binchey then told the court that it was never the court’s intention that the injunction he granted against RTÉ could prevent the fair reporting of utterances in the Dail. The judge said he hoped that this clarified matters, and invited submissions from lawyers in regards to redactions of his written judgement granting Mr O’Brien the injunction.

Ms Murphy’s comments to the Dáil concerned Mr O’Brien’s banking arrangements with IBRC. While moving a private members bill, Ms Murphy gave what she said were details of banking arrangements Mr O’Brien sought to keep when a special liquidator was appointed to wind up IBRC.

The case arose after the businessman sought an injunction preventing RTÉ from broadcasting details of his personal finances.

The three-day hearing had been told Mr O’Brien wanted to restrain publication of the broadcast report because it breached his privacy rights and would cause him incalculable commercial damage.

IBRC, which brought a separate but related application before the court, supported his case. RTÉ opposed it on grounds including the right to freedom of expression and public interest. It also argued the courts should be slow to interfere with legitimate journalistic judgment.

DISCOVER MORE CONTENT LIKE THIS