Mr George Redmond said it was totally wrong to suggest that advice he gave to Mr James Gogarty resulted in a JMSE company saving money on planning levies at the expense of Dublin County Council.
Mr Pat Hanratty SC, for the tribunal, said that Mr Redmond had a meeting with Mr Gogarty in the spring of 1988 in council offices about the fact that the 1983 planning permission would be expiring on the Forest Road site, owned by JMSE, in June.
Mr Redmond advised Mr Gogarty to apply for an extension of the existing planning permission and pay the services levy upfront at the 1983 rate.
Any levies paid at later rates would have amounted to £342,000 on a new application. The local authority in 1984 agreed an increase in levy from £4,000 per acre to £6,000.
Mr Hanratty put it to Mr Redmond that the effect of the JMSE company, Grafton Construction Ltd, adopting the course of action devised and suggested by him was that the company saved itself the difference between the £122,000 levy and a £342,000 levy at the expense of Dublin County Council.
Mr Redmond said: "Totally wrong, absolutely totally, and irresponsibly, may I add."
Mr Hanratty asked: "Why were you as assistant city and county manager sitting at a meeting with Mr Gogarty suggesting a course of action to him the effect of which was that a saving of the difference between £122,000 and £342,000 was effected at the expense of the local authority?"
Mr Redmond replied: "Because I was very conscious of the fact that if I told the man the truth, he would pay virtually very little. That was the position and I always felt a bit squeamish about Swords."
The chairman said the question he was asked was why he was at a meeting with Mr Gogarty suggesting a course of action which would effect a saving at the expense of the local authority.
"That's the question you were asked and that's the question I want an answer to. Specifically why?", the chairman told Mr Redmond.
Mr Redmond said: "There was absolutely no certainty about the level of future levies when I was sitting there in front of him. There was no prospect of whether or not he would get a renewal of permission. It was all amorphous at that stage."
The chairman asked: "Is it a coincidence that as a result of your advice, he [Gogarty] had not to pay any further levy?"
Mr Redmond replied: "That is the most extraordinary part of this whole business because when we do get down to the situation when the site is in new hands and we've a new application, so described by Mr Hanratty, the planning authority give it and no levy."
The chairman said: "Mr Redmond, what I want to know is did that flow from the advice you gave?"
Mr Redmond said: "Hold on and you see what happens and now we're really coming to the crunch.
"The planning authority gives permission and approves the housing and there's no levy and what happens? It's appealed by third parties and it's down to the [planning] board and we all start again."