Discovery order on Barry changed due to huge number of cash transactions

The tribunal has amended a discovery order made against Mr Oliver Barry, after hearing it would involve tracing "tens of thousands" of transactions between the concert promoter and his clients.

The tribunal had ordered Mr Barry to give details of transactions greater than £1,000, paid into accounts in his name or for his benefit, or into the accounts of others on his behalf.

But at the inquiry's first 2001 sitting yesterday, a solicitor for Mr Barry said that both the numbers of such transactions and the lack of detail available from banks made it practically impossible to comply with the terms of the order.

Mr John O'Connor cited "for argument's sake" the example of the Prince concert, saying that in such an event his client would be involved in numerous transactions with ticket agents around the country. It was "simply not possible" to identify all the accounts into which these payments went.

Counsel for the tribunal, Mr Patrick Hanratty SC, said the problem had arisen in the first place because the tribunal had discovered accounts, previously undisclosed, into which large sums of money were transferred on Mr Barry's behalf.

Mr Hanratty said that on the basis of evidence already given, there could not be "all that many" accounts involved, while Mr Justice Flood asked if increasing the threshold for transactions would help solve the "logistical problem".

But Mr O'Connor said that the number of transactions encompassed by the order "could run into tens of thousands". And whether the amounts were £1,100 or £11,000, it would not be possible to identify who had made the payments because "the bank cannot give us that information".

After an adjournment to allow the legal representatives reach a compromise, Mr Hanratty suggested the order be amended to raise the threshold for payments to £10,000 and to limit the period for disclosure to four years: from January 1st, 1988 to December 31st, 1991.

The tribunal heard that Mr Barry had cancelled a three week holiday planned for January because of the likelihood of a resumption in public hearings. But Mr O'Connor said his client would be travelling to Los Angeles on business between the 19th and 29th of this month.

The chairman said he had begun yesterday's sitting in the belief that public hearings would resume next week, and that the Century Radio "module" of the inquiry would be complete by the end of January.

After further exchanges, it was agreed that a number of "miscellaneous" witnesses would be heard on January 24th and 25th, and that Mr Barry would resume giving evidence on January 30th.

"I want absolute co-operation in return for that concession," the chairman added. "I really have stretched myself beyond my own belief."