An unidentified man and woman have withdrawn High Court proceedings aimed at stopping their names being published in a list of tax defaulters.
The pair did not proceed with their application after Mr Justice Frank Clarke gave a preliminary ruling yesterday to the effect that they were not entitled to bring the case on an anonymous basis.
The judge was told the man and woman, identified only as R Doe and B Doe in papers before the court, had last October made a €1.1 million settlement with the Revenue, including penalties and interest, arising from a tax liability dating back to 2001. Their names were due to be published in a list which appeared in yesterday's newspapers but that did not happen as they had initiated proceedings in the High Court.
Mr Justice Clarke turned down their application to remain anonymous in the proceedings for an injunction restraining the Revenue Commissioners from publishing their names and said he would give detailed reasons for his decision on January 17th.
Their lawyers then withdrew the application for an injunction preventing their inclusion in the official Government notices publication, Iris Oifigiúil, which is published on Tuesdays and Fridays.
The Revenue was obliged to publish the names within three months of the settlement and the deadline in the case of the man and woman is December 31st.
Earlier yesterday, Marie Baker, for the plaintiffs, said that if publication went ahead, the damage to her clients' reputations would be irreparable.
Her first application was to ask the court to allow the applicant to bring the case under aliases and in camera so that their constitutional right to privacy would be vindicated. There was no option but for her clients to go to court to vindicate their rights but this could only be done by first having obtaining the right to anonymity, Ms Baker said.
A remedy in damages would not be adequate enough to vindicate that right because of the damage to reputation from publication, she added.
In an affidavit by their solicitor, the court was told the plaintiffs had entered into a settlement to pay €1.136 million inclusive of penalties and interest.
They were then informed their identities were to be published in Iris Oifigiúil and were told the Revenue did not have any discretion about this. Ms Baker argued that the legislation did not provide for the publication of the taxpayer's name where the penalty was less than 15 per cent of the amount of tax paid.
In correspondence between a tax adviser acting for the plaintiffs and the Revenue, it was argued that the legislation set out how the penalty was to be calculated. The Revenue did not accept this applied only in cases where there was a dispute over the amount of tax they should have paid had their returns been incorrect.
There was also an issue over whether the use of the word "payable" or "paid" in the legislation had a bearing on the calculation of the penalty, Ms Baker said.
Anthony Collins SC, for the Revenue, said the Constitution required that justice be done in public and even the European Convention on Human Rights did not "trump" the Constitution in that regard. There were only very limited exceptions to this, he said.
After Mr Justice Clarke rejected the application for anonymity, Ms Baker said her clients did not intend to continue with their application.
The Revenue applied for costs and the judge said he would reserve that issue to January 17th.