Nevin and Cllr Cullen win High Court case
MEN AWARDED €20,000 EACH OVER DEFAMATORY PRESS RELEASE
A SITTING councillor said it was ‘a good day for local democracy’ as he and a former councillor were each awarded €20,000 in damages in a defamation case taken against Wicklow County Council and the former County Manager, Eddie Sheehy.
Cllr Tommy Cullen and former Councillor Barry Nevin had claimed an April 2013 press release by Mr Sheehy defamed them as it accused them of making unfounded, misconceived, inaccurate and serious allegations about the council’s purchase of a site at the Three Trouts in Greystones, which was bought by a Compulsory Purchase Order.
Mr Nevin, who lost his seat in 2014, and Cllr Cullen claimed that the press release portrayed them as unfit to be public repre- sentatives. They lost their case in Wicklow Circuit Court in 2013 but appealed the decision to the High Court where Ms Justice Marie Baker ruled in their favour last week.
‘We were fully vindicated and certainly it was a good day for local democracy and public representatives,’ said Cllr Cullen.
‘Myself and Barry put a lot of time, effort and our own personal money at our own cost into this case. There was nothing in it for us, everything we raised was in the public interest.’
Cllr Cullen added that the whole legal process had taken its toll on his and Mr Nevin’s families.
‘It was a big relief. This matter dates back all the way to 2011 and it was 20 gruelling days in the High Court, but we have been fully vindicated.
‘We were doing our jobs as public representatives and we were complimented in court for that.
‘It is a relief for both of our families, especially when it is such a comprehensive judgement. There can be no argument with the judgement but it was an exhausting trial. This was never about the money. As elected public representatives we were only doing our jobs,’ said Cllr Cullen.
‘We took a risk but it was in the public interest. We have now established our rights as public representatives to ask questions, get answers and defend the public interests.’
Mr Nevin also welcomed the High Court decision.
‘I am very thankful for the support of all my family and friends. Both Tommy and myself have been completely vindicated and I will let the High Court judgement speak for itself,’ he said.
Ms Justice Baker felt the press release had defamed both Cllr Cullen and Mr Nevin and portrayed them as ‘unworthy to public office.’
Submissions on legal costs will take place in October. We GOT very traumatic news from home at the weekend. The dog, our much loved but sometimes vicious family pet, had been thrown out of the dog minders for biting another dog.
The poor lady rang at 7.45 a.m. to ask us to get someone to collect him immediately. It had taken herself and her husband to pull them apart and the other dog had to be brought to the vet for treatment.
Mortification. Obviously we apologised profusely and said we would cover all costs incurred. But part of me was thinking it was our fault, for leaving him with strangers. And he wasn’t used to other dogs. I was filled with maternal guilt for abandoning him.
‘Don’t be making excuses for him. He’s a bloody nuisance of a dog,’ said Himself, picking up his phone to see who could we persuade to take him.
And that’s the thing about dogs. Nobody wants the responsibility of looking after them. I could find someone easier to take the kids than I could to mind the dog. Although given his recent list of misdemeanours, that’s probably understandable.
We rang the Father-In-Law, who pulls no punches at the best of times. ‘Are ya mad? That dog’s a lunatic,’ he told us, refusing to take him.
Then we rang friends of ours, the kind of friends that would do anything for you – except mind a dog, it transpires. ‘Oh you know we’d do anything for ye but I couldn’t control him.
To be honest, he scares the life out of me.’ Fine, I thought. Last time we’ll be bringing ye back duty free from holidays.
In desperation, Himself rang his brother, who has his own dog, and to our huge relief he agreed to take him on probation. We thanked him and the sister-in-law profusely, promising bottles of gin and vodka to beat the band.
We texted the next day. He’d already been given two verbal warnings, one for eating their dog’s food as well as his own, and the other for robbing their dog’s bed.
Then late last night we received a cryptic text. ‘We have decided to rename Bowser ‘Curiosity’.
‘What are they talking about?’ I asked as I watched Himself turn pale. He was always quicker on the uptake than me.
He started texting furiously still not telling me what it meant. 30 seconds later he turned ashen. ‘What?’ I asked hesitantly, knowing I really didn’t want to hear the answer.
‘What did curiosity do?’
I stared at him blankly. ‘What are are you going on about? Oh no... killed the cat?’ I asked in horror.
‘Exactly. Their neighbour’s 19-year-old cat to be precise.’ He has now been detained in a sort of canine detention centre till our return.
Anyone interested in a dog of, eh, mixed lineage, great at killing mice, rats, eh, cats and possibly postmen? You know where to find me.