Cosgrave request to identify builder rejected

Former senator Mr Liam Cosgrave's reputation is taking "a thrashing" at the tribunal, his lawyers have said.

Mr Michael O'Higgins SC, for Mr Cosgrave, said the allegations against his client were enormously damaging and destructive of his life and his professional activity.

It was "a fact of life" that Mr Cosgrave's resources were limited. Institutions and wealthy individuals coming before the tribunal had "deep pockets" but he did not.

Mr O'Higgins said his client viewed with concern the possibility that he might have to represent himself because of the length of the hearings. There was no guarantee he could afford to have a senior counsel or solicitor present at the tribunal "indefinitely".

Mr O'Higgins made his remarks when seeking to obtain from the tribunal the name of a developer linked to Mr Frank Dunlop.

Mr Dunlop claims that part of £5,000 he paid Mr Cosgrave in 1992 was paid in respect of his support for a development other than Carrickmines. Yesterday, he wrote the name of the developer on a sheet of paper and passed it to the tribunal.

The tribunal has said the individual will feature in another module of its investigations and cannot be revealed now.

However, Mr O'Higgins said it was "all very well" for the tribunal to offer him the opportunity of cross-examining this person "at the end of module 20". For anything to remain on the record against his client for five minutes longer than necessary was unacceptable.

He accepted that the tribunal was dealing with its investigations on a module-by-module basis. However, someone's credibility could not be dealt with on a modular basis; credibility was indivisible, yet Mr Dunlop's credibility was a strong feature of the tribunal's investigations.

Mr Justice Flood rejected the application saying there was "absolutely no reason" why Mr Cosgrave could not deal with the simple allegation by Mr Dunlop when his position was that he did not receive any improper payments. The identity of the developer would be revealed later and the opportunity to cross-examine this person would arise.