A High Court judge yesterday sharply criticised the British company now at the centre of a row over its decision to withdraw insurance cover from a number of Irish hospital consultants.
Mr Justice Johnston said the behaviour of the Medical Defence Union (MDU) which had left a consultant "swinging in the wind" when a case against him was about to be heard was "appalling".
He made his comments when an action being taken against consultant obstetrician Dr Brian Davidson by the North Western Health Board came up for mention. The health board is seeking to recoup over €4 million it paid last year in damages in a cerebral palsy case.
The case, the court heard, had originally been fixed for last October and now for March 1st. The MDU, it was stated, only indicated to Dr Davidson in December that it would not assist him if any award was made against him.
Mr Justice Johnston said he wanted to know why the MDU had "pulled the plug" in this case.
He said it was one thing for the company to decide not to provide assistance to a consultant before a case commenced, but it was another thing "to mess around with the court" and withdraw when a case was about to be heard.
He regarded it as "an interference" with the court.
Mr Paul Gallagher SC, for the MDU, said his client had made the decision in good faith and had no desire to interfere with the court.
The judge responded that he regarded what happened as "an absolute affront" and a disruption to the court.
Mr Gallagher said he regretted any disruption but very serious issues had arisen over the introduction by the State of enterprise liability - a new way of insuring consultants - and the MDU had done its best to sort them out.
Mr Justice Johnston said that might be Mr Gallagher's opinion but in his opinion the MDU should not have "pulled the plug" at this stage in a case. He regarded it as an abuse of their power. "I want you to tell them I regard it as a grave discourtesy," he said.
Furthermore, he said Mr Gallagher had been instructed to come to court and justify a totally unjustifiable position. "I'm not easily riled but I regard this as an affront of the worst possible kind," he added.
Mr Richard T. Keane SC, for the health board, said he had 45 witnesses ready for the case, 10 of whom were coming from abroad.
Mr Jack Fitzgerald SC, for Dr Davidson, said he had just taken on the case after Dr Davidson's solicitors, which were provided by the MDU, had felt he should now be independently advised. He needed time to be fully briefed and therefore felt the case could not go on in March.
The judge said under the circumstances he had no option but to withdraw the case from hearing on March 1st to give Dr Davidson time to take advice.