Ansbacher (Cayman) has said it will not voluntarily co-operate with the authorised officer inquiring into the operation of the Ansbacher deposits.

It has also claimed an order served on it by the officer, Mr Gerard Ryan, on January 14th last, is invalid under Irish law and was not properly served.

Details of the attitude being taken by the bank are contained in a written judgement of a Cayman Islands court outlining the reasons for a decision taken by it earlier this month. The judgement was issued yesterday and has been seen by The Irish Times. The court case was held in camera.

Legal advisers to Mr Ryan and to the Tanaiste, Ms Harney, who appointed him, are examining the judgement before deciding on their next move in their attempt to get access to vital documents concerning the operation of the deposits.

If Ansbacher (Cayman) does not volunteer to hand over the documents, which are central to identifying the beneficiaries of the Ansbacher deposits, the only way it can be forced to do so is through a successful application for such an order to the Cayman courts.

The judgement of Mr Justice Anthony Smellie QC, of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, explains why he ruled that he did not have jurisdiction to hear an application from Ansbacher (Cayman). The bank had sought a ruling under the Cayman confidentiality laws as to whether it could co-operate with the order from Mr Ryan. However at the same time it argued that Mr Ryan's order had not been properly served.

Mr Justice Smellie said that until the issue of whether the order had been properly served was decided on, it would be inappropriate for his court to assume jurisdiction. The order was served on the Dublin legal firm A & L Goodbody and the bank argued the firm was not its authorised agents for the acceptance of service.

"However these challenges are matters which Ansbacher acknowledges can only be resolved as a matter of Irish law and ultimately by the Irish courts," Mr Justice Smellie said in his judgement.

The bank was seeking a direction from the court as to whether it could, under Cayman law, comply with Mr Ryan's order, Mr Justice Smellie said, "even though Ansbacher declares that it does not intend voluntarily to comply with the mandate". The judge referred to files on the Ansbacher deposits which are being sought by Mr Ryan. "These are files said to contain records relating to alleged illegal banking activity carried on by Ansbacher in Dublin and which allegedly include records of transactions involving the questioned or corrupt payments to public officials."

The judge wrote that the alleged banking activity is said to have been carried on for over 20 years "without being licenced" and that the files are thought to include records of transactions on behalf of very many other residents of Ireland who are alleged to have transacted "clandestinely and illegally with Ansbacher (through certain Irish correspondent banks or individuals) for the purpose of evading Irish revenue and exchange control laws".

Mr Justice Smellie said the evidence before him was that some of the records had been obtained from a custodian in Dublin, others had been destroyed, and that still others were taken from Dublin to the Cayman Islands, where they are believed to be still maintained by Ansbacher.

The judge said Mr Ryan's appointment "extends to correspondent banks allegedly involved in the clandestine and illegal activities on behalf of Ansbacher".