FORMER FIANNA Fáil Senator Ivor Callely’s High Court bid to quash a finding that he misrepresented his place of residence for the purposes of claiming expenses has been adjourned until October.
Mr Callely’s senior counsel, Michael O’Higgins, said his client had “literally not had a day’s peace” since the Committee on Members’ Interests of Seanad Éireann produced its report in July.
The committee had investigated why he claimed for the 370km journey between Leinster House and a property in Kilcrohane, west Cork, instead of from a property in Clontarf, Dublin, over a two-year period.
Mr O’Higgins said Mr Callely, who was not present in court, had been portrayed by the committee as “a pariah” and “a chancer, a rogue, a thoroughly despicable person”, who had “ripped off” the State to the sum of some €80,000.
Mr Callely is seeking to have the report’s findings declared null and void. He is also seeking damages.
Yesterday, the High Court also heard that the committee, represented by Gerard Hogan SC, will oppose the Senator’s bid to bring a legal challenge against its decision.
The members of the committee are Senators Pat Moylan (FF), who is also Cathaoirleach of the Seanad, Camillus Glynn (FF), Denis O’Donovan (FF), Joe O’Toole (Independent), Alex White (Labour), Frances Fitzgerald (Fine Gael) and Dan Boyle (Green Party).
Mr Justice Seán Ryan said he was adjourning the leave application until September 28th. He said the case would be before the president of the High Court, Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, on that date for mention only, with a view to the case being heard on October 4th.
The judge said the case was one of “real importance”, which “raised issues that had not been ventilated before the courts previously”. He agreed with a proposal for a “telescope hearing”, so all matters could be heard at the same time.
Both sides had expressed their hope that the case would be heard before the Seanad resumed sitting at the end of the month, but the judge said he did not believe the matter could be satisfactorily dealt with before then.
In his proceedings, Mr Callely claims the committee erred in law, failed to have regard to relevant considerations, and that its report was carried out in breach of fair procedures. Moving the application, Mr O’Higgins said the only complaint before the committee was that Mr Callely had misrepresented his normal place of residence.
Mr O’Higgins said his client’s claim for expenses from west Cork was validly made under the definition of a member’s “normal place of residence”.
Counsel said that under a definition by the Department of Finance, supplied to him by the members services of the Houses of the Oireachtas, this normal place of residence did not necessarily have to be a permanent, principal abode, but had to be a premises that was used for a lengthy period and went beyond mere shelter or passage – such as a few nights in a hotel.
Counsel said it was Mr Callely’s view and the view of the members services that he was entitled to make the expense claim he did. Counsel claimed the committee erred in law by confusing the meaning of the definition of what is a normal place of residence.
Mr Callely had a legitimate expectation that the working definition of place of residence that he was provided with would apply when the committee was considering the complaints against him, said counsel. It was very clear, counsel added, that a member of the committee, Mr O’Toole, had completely disregarded to apply the definition provided to the Senator. Another Senator, Alex White, stated it was irrelevant that the Co Cork residence complied with the definition of normal place of residence.