MILLIONAIRE businessman and senator, Dr Edward Haughey has lost a court attempt to compel a magazine editor to reveal the source of an article which was critical of him.
In the High Court in Belfast, yesterday, Mr Justice Shiel upheld a claim of journalistic privilege by lawyers for Patrick Prendiville, editor of Phoenix magazine and the publishers, Penfield Enterprises Ltd.
The judge dismissed an appeal by Dr Haughey, the £730,000-a-year head of Norbrook Laboratories, Newry, against a High Court Master's decision not to order Mr Prendiville to reveal the source.
The article stated, among other things, that Dr Haughey, of Ballyedmond Castle, Co Down, had written 14 letters to Newry and Mourne Council alleging irregularities at a caravan site close to his holiday chalet at Cranfield. Co Down, after the owner had refused to sell him a portion of land blocking his sea view.
There was also a reference to a letter written to Dr Tony O'Reilly, owner of Sunday World, in which Dr Haughey said the paper's campaign against him was placing his life in danger from the IRA.
Lawyers for Dr Haughey had claimed there was a strong inference the information was obtained from documents relating to a 1988 libel action against Sunday World.
They were released under a court order and at the time there was an undertaking that they would not be used for any other purpose.
The defendants' lawyers relied on Section 10 of the 1981 Contempt of Court Act, under which no one responsible for a publication can be ordered to disclose the source of information unless it is considered necessary in the interests of justice, national security or prevention of disorder or crime.
Mr Justice Shiel said some of the original documents were clearly intended to be private and confidential and he could understand Dr Haughey's grievance at the contents of his letter to Dr O'Reilly being disclosed.
But while he did not lose sight of the fact that there was a strong inference the source was to be found in the original documents, it had not been established on the balance of probabilities that disclosure was necessary in the interests of justice so as to override the protection granted by parliament in the Contempt of Court Act.
The judge did not consider that the interests of justice in the case were of "such preponderating importance" or were "so pressing" to overcome the ban on disclosure.
He ordered Dr Haughey to pay the costs of the hearing and granted leave to appeal.