Denis O’Brien rejects ‘lack of candour’ accusation
Mr Justice Colm MacEochaidh made the comment before reserving judgment on Mr O’Brien’s application for orders compelling Red Flag to name a client who commissioned a dossier of material about the businessman, which he alleges is evidence of a campaignn to damage him.
The judge hopes to rule by the end of the law term on December 21.
Mr O’Brien claims that Red Flag and its unknown client are involved in the alleged campaign and he wants the client’s identity now so as to sue that client, along with Red Flag, for damages for alleged conspiracy and defamation.
Among Mr O’Brien’s concerns is whether the dossier, particularly material in it about the planned IPO earlier this year of his company Digicel (which ultimately did not proceed), was sent to hedge funds, his counsel Michael Cush said. It was relevant whether the client is a “benign hedge fund” or a rival of Mr O’Brien’s, he added. The issue was not whether the dossier was published to millions, but “who it was sent to”.
Mr O’Brien rejected claims by Red Flag of a “lack of candour” by him related to how he learned of Red Flag’s involvement with the dossier, counsel added.
Opposing the application Michael Collins, for Red Flag, argued it has a duty of confidentiality to the client and there is no legal basis for the order, which was a “fishing exercise” involving a “procedural morass”.
Mr O’Brien was refused orders in October to seize computers and devices from Red Flag’s offices, counsel outlined. Instead, he got freezing orders preserving material on the devices and further orders permitting imaging of the material.
Many of the firm’s clients were concerned their data held by Red Flag had been forensically imaged as part of Mr O’Brien’s proceedings.
