The opening day of the appeal arising out of Mr Albert Reynolds's libel case against the Sunday Times began not with the former Taoiseach making his case, but with the newspaper arguing that it had a right to publish.
In the same courtroom in the Court of Appeal in London which has rather ominously seen such people in its dock as Roger Casement and William Joyce (Lord Haw-Haw), a rather less colourful theme of qualified privilege was discussed.
The Sunday Times went first and appealed a decision where the judge ruled that no such privilege attached to the words in the article which brought about the case.
Mr Reynolds will then bring his appeal on the decision in the libel case arising from an article by Alan Ruddock in the Sunday Times in November 1994 at the time of the collapse of the coalition government and the subsequent resignation of Mr Reynolds as Taoiseach.
The jury found in November 1996 that the words were defamatory, but awarded zero damages. The judge subsequently made an award of one penny. The jury also decided that the newspaper had not acted maliciously in publishing the words. Mr Reynolds will also be liable for the costs of the case, as the damages award did not meet an offer of £5,005 from the newspaper.
Yesterday, in the Court of Appeal before Lord Chief Justice Bingham, Lord Justice Hirst and Lord Justice Robert-Walker, it was a considerably quieter affair than the high-profile six-week libel trial had been.
Mr Reynolds arrived a quarter of an hour before the start of the hearing and was accompanied by his British solicitor, Ms Pamela Cassidy.
Lord Lester, for the newspaper, said that the defence of privilege was based on the concept of public interest. He said that Mr Reynolds had been an architect of the peace process, and this therefore was a matter in the British public interest.
He trawled through many legal precedents from all around the world, from a ruling in the New Zealand Court of Appeal, which he described as a landmark judgment which "does the job for me", to the US, Pakistan, South Africa and Europe.
There were lighter moments. When Lord Lester talked about the term "public figure", the Lord Chief Justice asked: "We're not talking about Paul Gascoigne?" Lord Lester: "No."
The case is expected to take two weeks.
Before the lunch adjournment, the Lord Chief Justice said that the court would not be prejudiced if Mr Reynolds, because of his commitments, was not able to attend the entire time.
However, outside the court, Mr Reynolds indicated that he would be there every step of the way.