Lawyers hint of High Court move on Finnegan

Tribunal lawyers have hinted they may bring auctioneer Mr John Finnegan to the High Court over his failure to produce the records of his trust in Guernsey.

Mr Pat Hanratty SC, for the tribunal, said Mr Finnegan would have "a problem" if the matter ended up in the High Court, because the evidence clearly showed that he was in control of the trust and could instruct the trustees to release the documents.

However, Mr Finnegan repeatedly insisted that he had done "everything possible" to obtain the documents but had been refused access by the trustees in Guernsey. "There's no more I can do," he told the tribunal yesterday.

He said lawyers in Guernsey had told him they hoped to have proceedings against the trustees heard "by the end of the month". The tribunal is investigating a number of land deals involving Mr Finnegan and the builders Brennan and McGowan, arising from which the three men shared large sums of money in Jersey. A sum of £60,000 was paid to the politician, Mr Ray Burke, in 1984 out of the proceeds of one of the deals.

Mr Hanratty accused the witness of engaging in "brinksmanship" since the tribunal first sought the documents last April. It was only when the tribunal put pressure on him that he took steps to give the appearance of seeking the records, he said.

Counsel said the proposed litigation was "a charade", just like the earlier pretence to obtain the information.

"I can't accept that. That is going too far," Mr Finnegan replied. "I'm doing my level best to get the information." Asked why he did not just sack the trustees for acting unlawfully, he said he was awaiting a report from his lawyers on this matter.

Mr Hanratty repeatedly put it to the witness that he was in complete control of his trust. He cited a variety of evidence, including letters written by Mr Finnegan's solicitor, Mr Michael O'Shea, which appear to show that the auctioneer "called the shots" on the trust.

Mr Finnegan described this claim as "a sweeping statement". He was not in control of the trust but in most cases the trustees would "listen to what I would say". But asked to identify any case where the trustees would not comply with his wishes, he said he could not think of one.

He accused Mr Hanratty of making "hurtful" and "upsetting" remarks by suggesting that his stance was "a charade". He disagreed with the evidence of his solicitor, Mr O'Shea and suggested that Mr O'Shea should be recalled to the witness box.

Mr Justice Flood said it was his impression that Mr Finnegan was the "de facto manager" of the trust. Whether he had the power to impose his will on the trustees was another matter. Mr Hanratty also contested the claim by the witness that he had in fact invested money in the land deals. Brennan and McGowan said he didn't invest anything in the transactions.

Counsel described as "a rabbit pulled out of a hat" Mr Finnegan's claim that he invested £33,000 in the purchase with Brennan and McGowan of lands owned by the Convent of the Sacred Heart at Monkstown. He accused the witness of "hiding behind the mask of a fool" by claiming not to be familiar with the mechanics of this transaction.

He asked if Mr Finnegan was unaware that an offshore company, which he owned with Brennan and McGowan, had purchased the freehold interest of the land owned by the nuns. Mr Finnegan acted as selling agent for the nuns in the transaction.

"I was not aware at the time but I might have been made aware of it later," the witness replied.