A legal dispute between Ryan Tubridy and RTÉ heralds a new phase in the conflict between the cash-strapped State broadcaster and its former star presenter. Whether the row ends up in the Four Courts is anyone’s guess. But the two sides appear to be very far apart.
At issue is Tubridy’s 2020 contract. That bargain, scheduled to run until April 2025, embraced his well-remunerated duties as host of The Late Late Show and his morning radio programme. Tubridy stood down from the TV show in May but his radio show continued for a few weeks until it was suspended in June on day one of the payments affair. After a summer of scandal, Tubridy is off the RTÉ airwaves definitively with little prospect of returning any time soon.
When controversy first erupted, Tubridy was quick to dispute RTÉ's public claim that his contract ended when his 14-year run on the The Late Late Show came to an end. The situation has since changed markedly. RTÉ director general Kevin Bakhurst scrapped a deal on his return to radio at the last minute in August, citing a breakdown in trust over a Tubridy press statement. From RTÉ's perspective, that move ended the relationship with the presenter.
“There has been legal correspondence, just about the ending of the contract,” Bakhurst told the Oireachtas media committee on Wednesday. Bakhurst said “not as far as we are concerned” when asked whether RTÉ owes Tubridy any money.
All signs suggest Tubridy takes the contrary view, although his camp is saying nothing. RTÉ said only that it “has paid Ryan Tubridy up to August”, adding that there would be no further comment beyond what was said at the committee meeting. Bakhurst previously indicated that RTÉ paid Tubridy less than he sought while he was off the air from June.
[ Five new things we learned about RTÉ from the Oireachtas committee meetingOpens in new window ]
But what are Tubridy’s prospects of success if he takes a court challenge against RTÉ? “There’s no way a court is going to put him on air against RTÉ's will. He’s never going to get that relief,” said one barrister. “The question – if he was to succeed and he made a good point – would be whether he was compensated in lieu.”
Because Tubridy worked by contract for RTÉ and was not an employee per se, two legal figures said he would have no way of taking a case under the distinct statutory regime for unfair dismissals.
It may still remain open to Tubridy to take a case for wrongful dismissal in civil law, a case RTÉ would be certain to dispute. However, the barrister said that route could prove challenging for Tubridy. “That’s difficult enough. It’s very hard to get compensation for wrongful dismissal other than the value of the notice you were entitled to under the contract.”
One Dublin solicitor said the terms on which Tubridy’s contract were struck would be the defining point in any court action. “Most commercial judges will want to establish what was in the contract, and the contract will have primacy by and large, like everything in law,” the solicitor said.
“The starting point is what did the parties agree. If the parties agreed to something and for one of them it was improvident or unwise – and the other party wasn’t aware of that – the courts would be slow to move away from enforcing the parties’ bargain.”
So what did they agree? When Tubridy and his agent Noel Kelly appeared before two Oireachtas committees in July, the presenter’s aides published the contract. The document is clear that Tubridy’s company “shall not be paid any fees in respect of any period in which the presenter has not provided the services for whatever reason, including sickness, incapacity, holidays or other commitments”.
At one level, it is not too great a stretch to imagine RTÉ arguing the “for whatever reason” clause captures the circumstances in which Tubridy is out of the national broadcaster. Still, it is equally plausible to imagine Tubridy arguing it was RTÉ's very actions that the led to the situation in which he is out of a job with his RTÉ career in ruins.
Whatever about the political uproar over his disputed hidden payment that led to Tubridy’s downfall, the fact that they were set out in another three-way agreement between the presenter, RTÉ and Renault could well give him some legal cover. Still, the barrister said it was always open to the participants in a contract to end it. “A contract can be brought to an end within its terms.”
Then there is the matter of costs, a critical consideration for anyone considering legal action. “Fighting about the facts is more expensive than fighting about the law,” said the solicitor.
These considerations – and others, no doubt – will be on Tubridy’s mind as he plots his next move.
