A CORK man described by the Criminal Assets Bureau (Cab) in court as a suspected drug dealer has lost his Supreme Court appeal against court orders requiring him to pay some €3.3 million to the Cab following a tax assessment.
Patrick McSweeney, Bishopstown, Cork, had appealed against a High Court order of November 2004 that the Cab was entitled to judgment against him in the sum of €1.512 million, plus interest now standing at some €1.85 million.
The Cab sought the monies from Mr McSweeney following a tax assessment for 1994/95. Following an investigation, a Cab officer, who is also an officer of the Revenue Commissioners, made the assessment under the Finance Act and served the assessment on Mr McSweeney in February 1997.
On March 25th, 1997, Mr McSweeney filed a notice of appeal against the assessment.
The Cab replied on March 27th, 1997, that the letter from Mr McSweeney was not a notice of appeal as it had not complied with requirements of the Finance Act to bring an appeal within 15 days.
On April 1st, 1997, a demand for payment was made but Mr McSweeney brought High Court proceedings arguing that the assessment was unreasonable, irrational, arbitrary and made for "improper purposes".
In his High Court reserved judgment of October 2004, the then president of the High Court, Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan, rejected Mr McSweeney's complaints and gave judgment for the amount claimed. Further orders were made requiring Mr McSweeney to pay interest of €1.85 million.
The judge also rejected arguments by Mr McSweeney that certain provisions of the Criminal Assets Bureau Act 1996 were unconstitutional.
A central ground of the appeal was that the Cab was obliged but had failed to inform Mr McSweeney that he had 15 days to appeal against the tax assessment.
Giving the Supreme Court's judgment, the Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray, with Ms Justice Susan Denham and Mr Justice Adrian Hardiman, rejected that argument.
The Chief Justice said Mr McSweeney was advised at the time by solicitors and an accountant and the period within which an appeal could be brought - 15 days - was laid down by statute.
Mr McSweeney had not given evidence at any stage that he did not know of the time limit; nor had he said that, had he known, he would have appealed, the judge said.
