Mr Michael and Mr Thomas Bailey, their legal teams, counsel, solicitors, and any other persons acting on their behalf had no hand, act or part in supplying information for an article which appeared in the Irish Independent, counsel told the tribunal.
Mr Eamonn Leahy SC, for the Baileys and Bovale, was responding to queries from the tribunal about how the information had appeared. He said that on Tuesday morning he and other counsel had been given documents by the solicitors which they had received the previous day. It was the first that counsel had seen of them.
They inquired where they had come from. They mistakenly thought they came from the tribunal. This was clarified.
The solicitors' office received an envelope posted from Gerrard Scallan and O'Brien, solicitors for Anglo Irish Bank.
The chairman, Mr Justice Flood, said: "This (article) has detail in it which, while I accept members of the press can have some degree of poetic licence, this was a factual story written by a very good correspondent of the press, who did not get it out of the ether. I am not in any way criticising Sam Smyth, he was simply doing a job."
He took a very serious view of this whole matter, he said. Mr Leahy said he had no knowledge, nor did his counsel team, or solicitors (Smith Foy & Co) of any internal bank matters.
Mr Leahy said he clearly had to take instructions on the matter. He said that in the article there was reference to what seemed to be a contemporaneous note from the bank.
"We do not have those, we've never had those, the people who have them is the bank," he said.
The chairman said the legal team had received a transcript of the interviews. By virtue of the Supreme Court decision it certainly was not available for use. Mr Leahy's solicitors certainly had those documents.
Mr Leahy said the solicitor had it on Monday afternoon. He said that they did not know who in the bank may give evidence.
Mr Frank Callanan SC, for Mr James Gogarty, asked whether Mr Leahy could assure the tribunal that the Baileys, their legal representatives or any other representatives had no responsibility for, and were not involved in, the story that appeared.
Mr Leahy said: "Nobody on our side had a hand, act or part in it."
The tribunal rose and when it resumed, Mr Leahy said: "I have taken instructions and clearly and unequivocally, neither I nor any other of the two counsel, their solicitors, neither his clients, Mr Michael Bailey nor Mr Thomas Bailey, or any other persons acting on their behalf had any hand, act or part in delivering any of the factual matters to the journalist or anyone else."