For Mr Justice Flood and his team at the planning tribunal, yesterday marked their first year in existence. But the lawyers who came to the party in Dublin Castle were not inclined to celebrate.
Their aim, more or less to a man, was to secure an adjournment of the hearing of Mr James Gogarty's evidence, planned for later this month. Mr Gogarty's allegations about planning and payments led to the establishment of the tribunal and the downfall of the former minister for foreign affairs, Mr Ray Burke, last year. But the lawyers also directed a few well-aimed shots at the tribunal itself. When Mr Eoin McGonigal SC, for Mr Burke, suggested the gathering look back at the tribunal's first year, he wasn't making a birthday speech.
Where, he asked, were the results of the tribunal's work? "Not one statement, not one document" had emerged, he claimed. What inquiries had the tribunal made to investigate, justify or corroborate the allegations made in Mr Gogarty's affidavit?
It was "unreal" that Mr Gogarty's statement had been drawn up by a firm of solicitors not accredited to the tribunal. "When are we going to have some sunlight" on the procedures in operation, he asked. Mr Burke was being left "completely in the dark". Mr McGonigal read extracts from articles in this and other newspapers about Mr Gogarty's allegations, and wondered whether the gardai had been contacted in relation to these. If they had, why had these files not been furnished to the parties at the tribunal? Mr Gogarty, now 81, came in for sustained attack. Mr Colm Allen SC, for Mr Michael Bailey and Bovale Developments Ltd, said the allegations in Mr Gogarty's affidavit were couched in "scabrous terms" and would give rise to scandal.
Mr Gogarty's version of events "changes with the weather". His affidavit was "littered with falsehoods and untruths".
As for Mr Gogarty's age, "he was a great deal younger when he started making these allegations and he will be a great deal older when he makes his final allegation, whatever that might be".
Mr Brian O'Moore, for Mr Gogarty, said Mr Allen was trying to advance his case by "rubbishing" Mr Gogarty, and by characterising him as a bitter old man telling a story which had changed. The sooner Mr Gogarty's evidence could be tested on oath, the better.
Whether and when that happens is now in the hands of Mr Justice Flood. He is left with little choice; the clear threat of High Court proceedings hangs over any refusal to adjourn proceedings, and even a short postponement is unlikely to satisfy all parties.
He might do well to hang on to the birthday candles.