A MEMBER of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority sent an e-mail declaring “happy days” and “our pension is now secured” after the board sanctioned getting involved in buying the Irish Glass Bottle (IGB) site at Ringsend, the Commercial Court has heard.

The e-mail, sent on November 1st, 2006, by DDDA member Thomas Mulligan, was part of a chain of e-mails circulated to the directors of the authority by the personal assistant to former chief executive Paul Maloney, developer Bernard McNamara said.

It stated: “Happy days. Congratulations to Paul and the team. Our pension is now secured,” Mr McNamara said. The authority, having overseen much of the development of the docklands, “had of course perpetuated itself by entering into this transaction”, Mr McNamara added.

Mr Maloney had e-mailed the same day that the agreement “presents a major opportunity for DDDA to create influence and expand its role in the Poolbeg peninsula”.

These and other documents obtained for court proceedings showed such was “the determination” with which the authority pursued the site, later bought for €412 million, that neither it nor its advisers fully considered its legal entitlement to enter into a joint venture agreement (JVA) with Mr McNamara and his company Donatex to purchase a public company, Mr McNamara said.

Mr McNamara has claimed – following a 2008 High Court finding that the authority acted outside its powers in how it fast-tracked permission for another docklands development at North Wall Quay – that it was never entitled to enter into the November 2006 agreement, as it was similar to the overturned North Wall agreement.

Mr McNamara, Ailesbury Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin, and Donatex Ltd, Pembroke Road, Ballsbridge, has sued the authority claiming it was unable to perform its obligations under the IGB deal, therefore frustrating the ability of Mr McNamara and others to develop the site, meaning very substantial losses for them.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly yesterday received a 31-page affidavit from Mr McNamara grounding his application for a preliminary hearing on the issue of whether the authority had power to enter into the 2006 agreement.

Mr McNamara claims that, if the court decides the authority had no such power, the full court proceedings are determined in his favour.

Mr Justice Kelly made directions for the exchanges of documents concerning the motion and adjourned that issue and discovery issues to December 20th, when he will fix a date for hearing of the motions.

In his affidavit, Mr McNamara said documents indicated the authority’s board was not told about reservations as to the authority’s capacity to enter into the JVA. It seemed the power of the authority to enter into such a JVA was questioned by some officials of the Departments of the Environment and Finance, and by its solicitors, he said.

It also seemed legal advice about the capacity of the authority to enter this type of investment was never considered either by the authority or the relevant government departments. Given the determination of the authority to acquire the IGB site and the short time limits for the tender, it seemed “short cuts” were taken.

Three members of the authority’s board who attended an October 24th, 2006, meeting to approve the JVA heads of agreement had potential conflicts of interest, as they were directors of Anglo Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland, he said.

While those three – authority chairman Lar Bradshaw, Seán FitzPatrick and Declan McCourt – offered to withdraw from that meeting, they did not actually do so, he added.

Mr McNamara said other documents of October 2006 showed the Department of the Environment had in principle supported the authority’s request to sanction borrowings up to the statutory maximum – €127 million – to acquire properties within the docklands for development.

The authority has denied it or Paul Maloney made “representations” to Mr McNamara which induced him to get involved in a joint bid with the authority for the site.

It also pleads any losses suffered by Mr McNamara over the site acquisition are not attributable to its alleged failure to fast track permission for the site as, it claims, such permission always had to be approved by the Minister for the Environment.