New row over settlement payment to former CHI business manager

Judge told on Friday there was a dispute between business manager's lawyers and CHI over the treatment of the settlement payment for her and of the payment of €200,000 to her solicitor for the legal costs of the case

Anita Little managed and administered the waiting list for CHI spinal surgeries until her purported dismissal following what she said was a flawed investigation and disciplinary hearing. Stock picture

A row has broken out over payments related to the case of former Children's Health Ireland (CHI) business manager Anita Little who reached a settlement over her purported dismissal in August 2025, the High Court has heard.

Ms Little managed and administered the waiting list for CHI spinal surgeries until her purported dismissal following what she said was a flawed investigation and disciplinary hearing.

She claimed misconduct proceedings were brought against her by CHI as a result of an instruction by her superiors to delist 10 patients from the spinal surgery waiting list.

Among other things, she said she was deprived of her right to call witnesses in her defence, introduce exculpatory documentary evidence or challenge erroneous findings of fact, or examine witnesses.

She obtained a temporary injunction last October restraining her dismissal and CHI later agreed not to do so pending further order.

Mediation followed which eventually resolved the dispute although there then followed numerous complaints from her side over the time it was taking for two government departments to approve the deal.

Approval came after three months and after the judge in the case, Mr Justice Brian Cregan said he wanted an explanation from the departments involved.

On Friday, the judge was told there was now a dispute between Ms Little's lawyers and CHI over the treatment of the settlement payment for her and of the payment of €200,000 to her solicitor for the legal costs of the case.

Her barrister, Richard Kean, said CHI is refusing to pay Ms Little's solicitor, Caoimhe Haughey, unless she provides a 'vendor services' form. However, this was "a nonsense" as Ms Haughey is not a provider of services to CHI and this has tax implications for her, he said.

Counsel said the more serious issue was in relation to the sum to be paid to Ms Little in settlement of the dispute. The agreement required it to be paid in the most tax-efficient way but CHI had decided to limit her reckonable service to just five years rather than 20 and this had major implications for the calculation of the payment from a tax viewpoint.

They were now seeking to punish both Ms Little and Ms Haughey, he said.

Mary Paula Guinness, for CHI, said her client was required to adhere to the national payment framework and guidelines of the Comptroller and Auditor General's office.

In relation to the payment to Ms Little herself, counsel said the payment was to be in the most tax-efficient manner but Ms Little had not provided any opinion for Revenue or otherwise in relation to it.

Ms Little was "with us for five years" and that was the payment that they were making but she should engage with Revenue on the matter and if too much tax has been deducted then she will be entitled to a higher payment, counsel added.

Mr Justice Cregan agreed with Mr Kean that it might be in ease of Ms Little if some of it was paid but, he said, it seems it will not be a full and final payment.

In relation to the payment to Ms Haughey, the judge also agreed she was not a provider of services to CHI.

He said he was going to "cut through the nonsense" and direct that the sum of €200,000, inclusive of Vat, be paid and he expected all the appropriate bodies to comply with it.

He adjourned the case to October.