Court told licence termination was biased

A DECISION by the Independent Radio and Television Commission to terminate Radio Limerick One's licence was prompted by bias …

A DECISION by the Independent Radio and Television Commission to terminate Radio Limerick One's licence was prompted by bias of a former employee who was a member of the commission, the High Court was told yesterday.

Mr James O'Reilly SC, for the radio station, said the decision to terminate the licence was unreasonable in law and was prompted by bias on the part of Ms Eileen Brophy, a former employee of the station and a member of the IRTC. The IRTC has denied these allegations.

The IRTC served notice on the station of the licence termination on February 16th last. It alleged there had been 17 breaches of its contract under the Radio and Television Act 1988.

On March 3rd last, Mr Justice McCracken granted an order restraining the termination of the licence pending the hearing of the High Court proceedings. He also gave the radio station leave to challenge the IRTC's decision to withdraw the licence.

READ MORE

Mr Gerard Madden, chief executive of Radio Limerick One, in an affidavit, said the journalist concerned had been appointed head of news at the station in January, 1993.

Mr Madden said they believed Ms Brophy had demonstrated she was not suitable for the position as her news reports gave rise to complaints. Ms Brophy terminated her contract in November, 1993, and subsequently claimed she had been unfairly dismissed. The matter was settled before the Employment Appeals Tribunal on February 9th, 1994. It was around this time Ms Brophy was appointed a member of the commission.

Mr Madden said he understood that, while Ms Brophy excused herself before a vote was taken at a meeting of the IRTC to issue a termination notice, she was present for the discussion regarding the case. She did not attend the meeting where the station made representations concerning the suspension but did take part in all earlier meetings where the seriousness or otherwise of the alleged breaches was concerned. Mr Madden believed there was an adequate explanation for all the alleged breaches of the contract.

The case continues today.