A High Court judge yesterday said she was satisfied that a financial consultant had been taken on by a builder with lands in Co Meath because the consultant had said he knew politicians who "could get planning permission".
But this reflected no credit on either man, Ms Justice Carroll said in her judgment in an action by Mr Roderick Brennan and an engineer, Mr Ronald Bergin, for damages against the builder and his company.
The judge said there was no evidence to suggest any payment of "backhanders" to any county councillors or council officials to achieve a Section 4 motion (to contravene the local development plan). "Politicians of all parties were canvassed but Mr Brennan's efforts were singularly ineffective," she said.
Mr Brennan, Coolfore, Ashbourne, Co Meath, and Mr Bergin, Taney Road, Dundrum, Co Dublin, had sued Mr James Robert Farrell, Rockfield Road, Kells, and Farrell Homes (Kells) Development Ltd. They claimed hundreds of thousands of pounds in damages for financial and planning services provided between 1991 and 1991 and performance of agreements allegedly made between the sides.
In her reserved judgment Ms Justice Carroll awarded Mr Bergin £26,000 plus VAT and interest. Mr Brennan was awarded £16,000, without VAT, but with some interest. The judge said the case had been unnecessarily long - eight or 10 days - and she awarded costs of two days of the hearing to the plaintiffs.
The judge said Mr Farrell had claimed he had paid £6,000 cash out of money he got for way leave for certain lands. Mr Farrell had said it was £2,000 each for Mr Bergin and Mr Brennan. Mr Brennan had denied this and said they each got £3,000.
The judge said she found Mr Bergin's evidence about payments confused.
The judge held that Mr Bergin got £2,000 and Mr Brennan £2,000 plus £2,000. "What he did with the extra £2,000, I do not know," she said.
Ms Justice Carroll said the precise amount claimed for work done was stated to be £247,125 for Mr Brennan and £145,701 for Mr Bergin, totalling £392,826 plus £82,493 VAT. The plaintiffs' claim was said by them to be £905,200 plus VAT to each of the plaintiffs, having allowed credit of £7,550 for monies previously paid.