Supreme Court rules in Gilligans' favour over Cab legal costs

AN ATTEMPT by the Criminal Assets Bureau (Cab) to have drug dealer John Gilligan and his family pay the costs of their marathon…

AN ATTEMPT by the Criminal Assets Bureau (Cab) to have drug dealer John Gilligan and his family pay the costs of their marathon legal battle failed at the Supreme Court yesterday.

The Supreme Court said it would make no order on the application by the Cab for costs relating to proceedings dating back to 1996.

The decision means the Gilligans, most of whom were on legal aid, will not have to pay the Cab’s costs.

During the proceedings, John Gilligan had sacked his lawyers and represented himself.

READ MORE

The decision followed the rejection by the Supreme Court in December of an appeal by the Gilligans against High Court orders that their assets were the proceeds of crime.

While rejecting their appeal, the Supreme Court said there was no reason why the Gilligans could not commence new proceedings in relation to their claim an injustice had been done to them.

Those new proceedings were issued earlier this month in the High Court.

Yesterday, John Gilligan was back in the Supreme Court where he argued he was not in any position to pay the Cab’s costs because “anything I have the State has taken off me, so I won’t be able to pay”.

Gilligan also said he wanted the Supreme Court to reconvene over his case because of “many errors” in its judgment of December 19th last.

Chief Justice Mr Justice John Murray said there was provision for reconvening the Supreme Court where alleged errors had occurred, but there was a procedure for doing so which involved the issuing of a notice of motion and grounding affidavits.

Gilligan said he had already issued papers but not all of them appeared to have arrived in court. He said photocopying facilities at Portlaoise Prison, where he is serving a 20-year sentence, have been removed from him and he will now have to write everything out by hand to re-submit his application.

The Chief Justice said the court had no role in relation to those matters.

Until any application in relation to reconvening the court is dealt with, the December 19th judgment has “full force and effect,” he added.

In their original legal proceedings, the Gilligans sought to challenge orders made against them after the Cab first applied to the High Court in 1996 to freeze their assets and in subsequent proceedings appointing a receiver to sell the properties on behalf of the State.

The Supreme Court appeal, heard over two days last October, was in relation to a number of challenges to the original freezing order, appointment of a receiver and disposal of the properties which include Jessbrook House in Enfield, Co Meath, where Geraldine Gilligan lives, an equestrian centre attached to it, the former family home in Blanchardstown and two houses in Lucan bought by Gilligan for his son Darren and daughter Tracey.