A TOTAL of £6.7 million hash been granted to Mr Larry Goodman in solicitors' and barristers costs incurred during the two year Beef Tribunal, by the Taxing Master of the High Court.
Another £544,000 was granted to cover witnesses travel and subsistence, fees for expert witnesses, public relations costs and stationery. Various other sundry expenses were also met.
A 14 day stay has been put on payment of these costs at the request of the State, pending a possible objection. It has, however, been agreed that some of the monies will be paid, regardless of objections. The amount, probably between 55 and 75 per cent, is to be agreed by both parties by Friday.
Costs relating to legal fees for Mr Pat Rabbitte and Mr Tomas MacGiolla will be heard this morning.
Mr James Flynn gave his judgment yesterday, nine months after the hearing for costs began in October, 1995. It was halted in November when the Minister for Finance sought, and obtained, a judgment in the High Court that witnesses' expenses should be limited to those who gave oral evidence.
The total costs allowed to counsel for Mr Goodman and for Goodman International were Just over £3 million. Those allowed to his solicitors, A & L Goodbody, were £3.1 million, and £554,000 was allowed to Rory O'Donnell and Co, the solicitors who acted for Mr Goodman on the export credit insurance issue.
Of the legal fees, £923,170 go to Mr Dermot Gleeson SC, now Attorney General, for briefing fees, refresher fees (for days in court), non sitting days, preparatory days and for dealing with export credit insurance; Mr Donal O'Donnell SC, £651,875; Mr Ian Finlay, then a barrister and now a senior counsel, £623,025; Mr Seamus McKenna SC, £434,450; and Mr Michael Collins, barrister, £368,025.
Mr Flynn allowed £3.1 million to A & L Goodbody on the basis of the hours worked by partners, associates, assistants and apprentices.
Opening his judgment, Mr Flynn said it was not part of his function to examine the nature of the work carried out. The principle long established in law was that when a solicitor in good faith marked a fee note for a barrister that fee ought to be allowed.
In striking a proper fee with a barrister, a solicitor drew on his own experience of what the market would bear. The common law position of the Taxing Master was that he should take the position of a reasonable solicitor acting reasonably over fees.
It was universally accepted that no case could have a chance of success without preparation, he said. But this did not mean overkill.
For the State, Mr Peter Fitzpatrick SC had argued that Mr Goodman should not get costs which were based on over caution (over preparation). This was true, but Mr Goodman did not have access to government departments. Mr Gleeson was answerable to his client, who was answerable to his creditors, for every penny. Mr Flynn said that after examining the transcripts, he did not see how any evidence of over caution could be adduced.
There was a very steep learning curve involved in preparing the case. This included mastering the worlds of commerce, international trade, export credit, the beef trade, the Common Agricultural Policy, the beef mountain, etc. All this contributed to the growth of paper work.
It was not apparent from the material presented what the involvement of Mr Seamus McKenna was in this, Mr Flynn said. "It certainly is noticeable that he (Mr McKenna) did not generate much, if any, paper work during the course of the tribunal. From all the Advices(sic) on Proofs (sic) I have read I could not glean what actual work Mr McKenna did. I am not saying that Mr McKenna did not work but that it is not apparent from the material presented to me what his involvement was, or the extent of this involvement."
He was allowable counsel by order of the tribunal, and, accordingly, was entitled to his fees. But Mr Flynn ruled that he should not be allowed any fees for preparatory work.
He went over the negotiations between Mr Gleeson and his solicitors on fees. At the outset, in May June, 1991, his briefing fee had been estimated at between £125,000 and £150,000. However, the tribunal was late in starting and went on far longer than envisaged, and Mr Gleeson sought an increase. A fee of £175,000 was agreed in January, 1992. In July, 1992, he sought a further £40,000 to cover the period from September, 1992, to January, 1993. This was not agreed, and his briefing fee remained at £175,000.
In his concluding remarks, Mr Flynn said: "The Oireachtas saw fit to institute an inquiry into the beef processing industry, and the State is obliged by Order of the tribunal to discharge the costs which were reasonably incurred."