Chairman rebukes Taoiseach's lawyer

The tribunal has accused lawyers for the Taoiseach of acting improperly by introducing new evidence without advance notice.

Judge Alan Mahon said it was "improper" for Mr Ahern's legal team to "pull a quote out of nowhere" in relation to a 1978 court case in Co Cavan in which a judge referred to Mr Gilmartin as "shifty".

The introduction of this evidence by Mr Conor Maguire SC, for the Taoiseach, at the end of his cross-examination prompted furious objections by tribunal lawyers and up to five rounds of applause from the public gallery in support of Mr Gilmartin.

Mr Maguire claimed the witness had been "less than frank" in his evidence on the matters under investigation by the tribunal.

He had been "shifty" and had given dishonest evidence, he said, and he went on to say that this was not the first time Mr Gilmartin had been described as "shifty".

Judge Sheehy, in a court case in Cavan, had used this description and had said Mr Gilmartin had "all the hallmarks of being dishonest".

At this point, Ms Patricia Dillon SC, for the tribunal, objected, saying this was the third time Mr Maguire had attempted to "spring" something on the witness. The same rules applied to the Taoiseach as everyone else, namely, that his lawyers did not have the right to spring surprises on witnesses.

The gallery applauded.

Judge Mahon agreed. This kind of comment was "not helpful". The tribunal would have to examine independently the facts of the case before the worth of such evidence could be assessed.

Mr Gilmartin said he had no problem answering the question.

He had bought four acres in Virginia, Co Cavan, and let out the meadow through an agent for a nominal sum. The agent later sought to buy the land and when he refused, he was sued for specific performance.

In the case, Judge Sheehy would not hear his evidence, Mr Gilmartin, who comes from Co Sligo, said. "I was there sullying the names of decent local people. I was a shifty person." It was, the witness said to further applause, "a scandal typical of this country". The land was sold for a pittance but when he appealed the case, the other side "panicked" and he got three times the original amount.

Mr Maguire said he had no difficulty giving the tribunal a newspaper account of the case, from the Anglo-Celt in May 1978. There was no other way for him to go about his cross-examination.

Mr Liam Lawlor, representing himself, said the matter showed how inadequate the investigations of the tribunal legal team had been.

In earlier evidence, Mr Gilmartin told Mr Maguire he was bankrupted by the Inland Revenue in Britain as a result of "false information" supplied by "your client and his merry men". He denied Mr Maguire's assertion that he was "embittered". "Not a bit, I look at George Redmond and I feel sorry for him, and sorry I played any part in his downfall."

The only bitterness he felt was about the way his wife (who suffers from MS) wound up and "what was done to her and me by Owen O'Callaghan and his crooked politicians". Yet his family had prayed for Mr O'Callaghan when his daughter was injured and for Frank Dunlop when his son was dying, he said.

Mr Maguire said the witness had made a profit out of both Bachelor's Walk and Quarryvale. His "driving force" was to make a massive profit from these ventures from a small investment.

Mr Gilmartin denied this. He agreed that he had made £1.2 million on the sale of his stake in Bachelor's Walk but said he lost money on Quarryvale. He was paid £7.5 million when Mr Owen O'Callaghan bought out his stake but this was his own money.

He also lost £20 million on an office block in Milton Keynes in England he had built and paid for because of the "skulduggery" he encountered at the same time in Ireland.

The law in England was that as an Irish person you were guilty until proven innocent, he said.