Evidence concludes in Denis O’Brien defamation action

High Court Reporter

Evidence has concluded in a High Court action brought by two solicitors against businessman Denis O’Brien over an allegedly defamatory press release.

The defence closed their case on Tuesday without calling Mr O’Brien to the witness box in the defamation action, brought by solicitors Darragh Mackin and Gavin Booth against the businessman and his spokesman, James Morrissey.

The solicitors claim a sentence in Mr O’Brien’s October 2016 press release implied they acted for and received payment from the IRA.

The sentence read: “Sinn Féin/IRA certainly got the report they paid for.”

Mr O’Brien made the statement in response to a report on media ownership in Ireland. Mr Mackin and Mr Booth were credited as co-authors of the report, which was commissioned by then Sinn Féin MEP Lynn Boylan.

Mr O’Brien and Mr Morrissey deny the material defamed the solicitors or means what the solicitors allege. It is their case that the report was “skewed” and “biased”.

Prior to the beginning of the day’s evidence, the jury was informed that the O’Brien side was no longer pursuing their argument that Mr Mackin and Mr Booth were not identified in the press release as authors of the media ownership report.

Continuing his cross-examination of Mr Morrissey, Tom Hogan SC, appearing with Mark Harty SC and Conan Fegan BL instructed by Johnsons Solicitors, put to the witness that the purpose of the statement was to attack and discredit those responsible for the media ownership report. Mr Morrissey denied this.

Mr Hogan further put to Mr Morrissey that the motivation behind launching “the most serious of attacks” on the authors was that the report was potentially damaging to Mr O’Brien’s efforts to purchase the newspaper publisher Celtic Media Group.

“That is totally untrue,” Mr Morrissey said.

Mr Morrissey earlier stated that he published the statement to rebut the “imbalance” and “falsifications” in the “stitch-up” report.

Mr Hogan pressed the witness whether he agreed that claiming someone was paid by the IRA was a serious allegation.

“I wouldn’t,” Mr Morrissey said.

“I’m truly surprised at that answer, Mr Morrissey,” counsel replied.

Mr Hogan put it to Mr Morrisey that if he hadn’t included “IRA” in the complained-of sentence, “we wouldn’t be here”.

“In the murky world of the past, those two entities were one and the same,” Mr Morrisey said.

It is the defence’s case that the sentence complained of does not mean what the plaintiffs assert − that Mr Mackin and Mr Booth were paid by and act for the IRA.

Mr Morrissey agreed that he had never withdrawn or apologised for his statement.

Asked if he wanted to apologise to Mr Mackin and Mr Booth, Mr Morrissey said: “I’m here as a defendant, and I stand over what I did. I did it professionally, I did it honestly, I didn’t do anything covertly.”

The witness added that everyone is entitled to their good name and said that he respected that.

The court heard emails Mr Morrissey sent to news outlets with the press release were not produced in the proceedings as they’d been deleted by the witness.

Mr Morrissey accepted that he was “remiss” in not having the emails, but added: “I tell this court under oath that it [the deletion] wasn’t done for any covert reason.” He said he accepted the statement was issued “far and wide”.

When asked by Mr Hogan why the defence maintained in their case that the statement had not been published by media outlets, Mr Morrissey accepted that this was an error, and said he withdrew the contention.

Mr Morrissey described as “a bit pejorative” a suggestion that he was in court doing Mr O’Brien’s bidding. The witness said he took responsibility for his actions, and said that he would not pass over his actions to Mr O’Brien.

The case continues. Closing arguments are expected on Wednesday, followed by Mr Justice Tony O’Connor’s charge to the jury.