The widow of the late TD Liam Lawlor has lost her High Court bid to prevent the Mahon tribunal making serious findings of misconduct against either herself or her husband unless it establishes proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Mr Justice Roderick Murphy also dismissed Ms Lawlor’s application aimed at compelling the tribunal to fund “effective” legal representation for herself before it.
It is understood Ms Lawlor, who was in court today, is considering appealing the decision to the Supreme Court.
Ms Lawlor, of Somerton House, Lucan, Co Dublin, had in her judicial review proceedings sought several declarations, including that the Mahon tribunal may not make findings of serious misconduct against her late husband - who died in a car crash in Moscow in 2005 - or herself unless supported by evidence proven beyond any reasonable doubt and not on the balance of probabilities.
Ms Lalwor was granted limited representation by tribunal chairman Judge Alan Mahon in November 2005 and is a witness at the Quarryvale II Module of the tribunal. Her involvement is limited to lodgements made to her personal accounts between 1991 and 1995.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Murphy said that, while no standard of proof has been laid down in relation to tribunals of inquiry, it is assumed they operate on the civil standard of proof - the balance of probabilities.
Ms Lawlor argued the appropriate standard of proof was “beyond doubt” or alternatively “beyond any reasonable doubt” and not the “balance of probabilities”, in light of the serious allegations made against the late Liam Lawlor.
The judge also noted arguments that the standard of proof should be flexible according to the circumstances of the tribunal’s inquiries, the allegations made and the position of any persons affected.
Rejecting those arguments, the judge said the tribunal’s role was “fact-finding” rather than “the attribution of blame”.
The tribunal should not apply “a sliding scale of standard of proof” as this would undermine the tribunal’s discretion relating to finding facts.
The judge also ruled the tribunal had no power to provide for costs of “effective” legal representation for Ms Lawlor. If Ms Lawlor or anyone else was facing criminal proceedings, they would be entitled to the costs of their defence but tribunals of inquiry are neither criminal or civil trials, he said.
Having delivered judgment, Mr Justice Murphy agreed, on the application of Eoin McGonigal SC, for Ms Lawlor, to adjourn the issue of costs to the new legal term in October to allow the sides consider the judgment.