A High Court judge yesterday ordered a former minister for enterprise and employment and a former attorney general to answer two questions put to them by Irish Press Publications Ltd in advance of a libel trial.
Mr Justice O'Sullivan told Mr Charles Meenan, counsel for the ex-minister, Mr Richard Bruton TD, and the ex-AG, Mr Dermot Gleeson SC, that his clients had 21 days to answer two questions put to them by counsel for IPP Ltd.
Irish Press Publications is seeking damages for libel, negligence and wrongful interference with its constitutional right to its good name.
IPP is alleging that a ministerial press release issued on October 24th, 1996, libelled the company by referring to the length of time it had taken for the directors of IPP to "see the light" and release the three titles on the open market for sale.
The release also alleged that the course of action then being taken by the IPP could have facilitated, as far back as August 1995, a successful examiner process and preserved jobs at Burgh Quay.
IPP, in its statement of claim, says these words meant it had acted in an uninformed and ignorant fashion; that it had wilfully obstructed the examinership process in 1995 by wrongfully withholding the three newspaper titles from sale and that it had acted wrongfully by withholding the titles from sale, resulting in the loss of employment. Mr Lyndon MacCann, counsel for the newspaper group, asked the court for an order compelling the defendants to reply to a number of questions put to them by the plaintiffs.
He was not asking the ex-minister and ex-attorney general to indicate what witnesses they might call or what documents they intended to produce during the proposed hearing, Mr MacCann said. But he was asking them to identify certain particulars now and avoid unnecessary difficulties later.
His clients wanted the ex-minister and ex-attorney general to identify the statements of fact which they intend to allege are true and to identify those expressions of opinion which they are alleging constitute fair comment.
Mr Meenan said the ex-minister would plead in his defence that his statement was one of fair comment made under privilege.
There was no general rule that a defendant must produce particulars of fact and comment that may be relied upon in his defence, he said.
Mr Justice O'Sullivan ordered that both questions should be answered by the ex-minister and that the defence should have 21 days to respond.