Buckley case is ‘an attempt to damage Pitt’, court is told
FORMER INM chairman Leslie Buckley’s bid to have two High Court-appointed inspectors withdrawn from investigating matters at INM is a “deliberate” and “baseless” attempt to damage former INM chief executive Robert Pitt, the High Court has been told.
Mr Buckley’s application is “a circus” which is “wholly unmeritorious” and should be dismissed, John Rogers SC, for Mr Pitt, told Mr Justice Garrett Simons.
The application had been set up principally to damage Mr Pitt whom Mr Buckley has ordained his “principal accuser”, counsel said.
Mr Rogers was opposing Mr Buckley’s application to have the inspectors withdrawn on grounds of alleged objective bias.
Inspectors Seán Gillane SC and Richard Fleck strongly deny objective bias and oppose the application.
Their appointment was sought by the Director of Corporate Enforcement (ODCE) following an investigation into matters at INM arising from protected disclosures made in 2016 and 2017 by Mr Pitt and former INM chief financial officer Ryan Preston.
Five issues being investigated include alleged interrogation of the data of 19 individuals, including journalists and barristers, and Mr Buckley’s communication with Denis O’Brien as a major shareholder in INM.
Mr Buckley’s application centres on his complaints about the inspectors treatment of information and evidence in draft statements concerning the issues circulated to Mr Buckley and others.
Yesterday, Mr Rogers referred to an affidavit in which Mr Pitt said his evidence to the inspectors was “entirely truthful” and disputed claims by Mr Buckley of a “dramatic change” in some of it.
Mr Pitt said the inspection is at an early stage and it was “extraordinary” that Mr Buckley had attacked it when he “knows well” witnesses will be subject to cross-examination. The process adopted by the inspectors will protect all parties and is designed to reach a satisfactory conclusion, he said.
In submissions for the ODCE, a notice party, Neil Steen SC said the inspectors are experienced persons of the highest professional reputation. The ODCE believed the court should be slow to allow the application and take care to discourage such applications in the future.
Michael Cush SC, for Denis O’Brien, also a notice party, said Mr Buckley is a long-standing business associate of Mr O’Brien who continues to have regard for Mr Buckley’s ability and integrity. Mr O’Brien had no firsthand knowledge of many of the matters complained of by Mr Buckley but could readily understand his concerns. Mr O’Brien placed great reliance on statements from the inspectors including, inter alia, the inspection process is designed to encompass fairness. The hearing continues on Friday.