Garda Keith Harrison and his partner Marisa Simms face substantial legal bills after being refused most of their costs for appearing at the Disclosures Tribunal.

In rulings published on Thursday evening, tribunal chairman Mr Justice Peter Charleton said they were entitled to the costs of their legal representation up to and including the opening day of hearings, but no further costs beyond that point.

This means they will each face having to pay the costs of legal representation for 18 days of hearings, thought to amount to around €70,000 for Garda Harrison and €55,000 for Ms Simms.

The couple alleged gardaí conspired with Tusla to directly interfere in their family life in Donegal, as a result of the garda’s whistleblowing years previously in Athlone.

The garda claimed he was mistreated and bullied by colleagues and that gardaí colluded with Tusla to coerce a statement from Ms Simms and directed social workers to visit their family home in Letterkenny.

But Mr Justice Charleton concluded the allegations were “entirely without any validity” and exonerated gardaí and Tusla officials.

The judge describing some claims as “nonsense” in a report which was highly critical of the garda’s evidence.

The decision is the toughest costs ruling made by the judge at the tribunal.

At a hearing last month, Gda Harrison’s counsel Mark Harty insisted his client should be awarded all his costs.

Mr Harty said his client gave evidence “in a truthful manner, albeit that it wasn’t accepted as being the correct version of events”.

The hearing was marked by robust exchanges between the judge and the barrister.

At one point Mr Justice Charleton accused Mr Harty of shouting at him.

Ms Simms’ counsel Hugh Hartnett SC had said that if his client was not being awarded all of her costs, the maximum reduction should 25pc.

According to case law, the chairperson, in deciding the issue of costs, had to consider whether the witnesses cooperated with the tribunal.

Non-cooperation could include failing to provide assistance or knowingly giving misleading information.

In his ruling in relation to Gda Harrison, Mr Justice Charleton said: “This was a dreadful circumstance of allegations being made without basis.”

He said that despite the wrong done by Gda Harrison and “the obvious hurt and distress he caused to many individuals”, it was the tribunal’s duty to search for a basis on which some humane and lawful award of costs could be made.

The judge said it was possible, though he had serious doubts, that an award of costs should be made on a limited basis to a person making “scandalous allegations”.

He said all legal practitioners and judges were familiar with situations where “sense is achieved on the steps of the court” and allegations are withdrawn.

“Practitioners also know that allegations can be withdrawn in a brief court hearing on the basis of a serious consideration of reality; an exercise that can be helped by legal advice. That should have happened here, But did not,” the judge said.

Mr Justice Charleton said this was not to suggest there was anything wrong with the garda’s legal advice. “The opposite is assumed,” he said.

The judge made similar remarks in his decision on Ms Simms’ costs.

Source: Read Full Article