Judge wants explanation from solicitors over letter saying client had ‘no knowledge' of surveillance of payroll manager
Mr Justice Brian Cregan said he was not going to join Deel as either a defendant or notice party in proceedings being brought by Keith O'Brien, the man who was allegedly paid €5,500 a month to pass on trade secrets of his former employer, HR software firm Rippling, to rival Deel.
Rippling is now suing Deel and others, including Mr O'Brien, over the matter.
The judge said he would not join Deel in Mr O'Brien's separate case alleging harassment and surveillance because doing so, of the court's own motion, was an exceptional jurisdiction. It was also unfair to the O'Brien side who did not want Deel added anyway, and because of the separate Rippling case against Deel.
READ MORE
Mr O'Brien's case is against two private investigators which he claims have been involved in harassment of him and his family, including one who allegedly followed him by car to various locations and photographed his children playing in their garden.
The investigators, Mark Murran, also known as Rock Investigations, and Cliona Woods of Gotham Services, strongly deny any overt surveillance or claims of harassment and intimidation.
That case was back before Mr Justice Cregan on Friday when the judge ruled out joining Deel but said his main outstanding concern was a pre-litigation letter written by Deel's solicitors Hayes LLP in reply to a call from Mr O'Brien's solicitor to desist from the alleged surveillance/harassment.
In that letter, Hayes stated their client had no knowledge of the cars allegedly following Mr O'Brien.
On Tuesday, the judge described the Hayes letter as either a 'blatant lie or a misrepresentation' because it was later admitted as being incorrect because Deel said it had organised 'discreet' but not overt surveillance on Mr O'Brien.
On Friday, he said: 'The question from my point of view is that this is a letter from reputable solicitors who are officers of the court and it is blatantly wrong'.
He said Deel's barrister, Paul Gardiner SC, instructed by Hayes, indicated he (judge) should not have said it was a lie or misrepresentation but it seemed to the judge that it is still an issue for the court and should be properly addressed.
He said because of that letter, earlier this week in another case in which Hayes were representatives, he had a question as to whether he could rely on it although he did do so in that case.
He believed the next step was for Hayes to swear an affidavit as to how that replying letter to the O'Brien side was written.
Mr Gardiner said the letter was true at the time and while it turned out to be incorrect because discreet surveillance was commissioned by Deel, when written it was believed to be correct.
He felt what the court might be doing is 'putting a wedge' between Deel and its representation.
Mr Gardiner also believed the judge was being unfair to both Hayes and Deel in circumstances where fair procedures and due process have yet to take place and where the judge's words were being widely reported.
If the court is to have a separate inquiry into this letter, it should at least not take place until the O'Brien harassment proceedings have concluded which may well find there was no harassment, he said.
Mr Justice Cregan said he would give two weeks for Mr Gardiner to take instructions and consider the matter more fully and he said his concerns may be assuaged if it is explained in an affidavit.
The judge also granted consent orders, sought by Mr Murran and Ms Woods, that Mr O'Brien preserve any information, including on CCTV, dashcam and phone, relating to the allegations against them.
He also continued the injunctions restraining further surveillance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Are prize bonds still a good investment?
I have been a steady holder of prize bonds over the last number of years, and, together with winnings, have built up a fair amount. A few months ago, State Savings changed their policy by introducing larger prizes each week. (€50,000 each Friday, with €500,000 on the last Friday of the month). This has reduced dramatically the number of winners, and it has become like a lottery, except you do not lose your money! This has probably been further influenced by interest reductions. State Savings also started to notify winners by email, as well as sending winnings by mail the following Tuesday/ Wednesday. I am disturbed to see emails used to be sent at 2.40pm on the Friday, but now have become totally irregular, sometimes taking a few days. READ MORE As this prize-winning has become a lottery, are there independent observers as for the National Lottery, and previously with the Irish Sweepstakes? In addition, has the holding of brize bonds, lost its attractiveness? Mr M.T. Are prize bonds a good investment? That seems to be the kernel of your query. To be fair, your personal experience, at least until recently, appears to suggest they have been for you. I'm not sure that's a universal view. Certainly, in recent years, prize bond investors have been voting with their feet and walking away. Figures released a couple of weeks ago show that just shy of €351 million of new prize bonds were sold last year. That's a sharp 28 per cent fall on the previous year. That 2023 figure was itself down 20 per cent year-on-year and annual sales are now less than half the €735.7 million sold at the company's peak during Covid in 2020. An even bigger number came from people selling their investments. Requests for repayment came to €538.2 million last year. That is up just over 1 per cent year-on-year but 90 per cent up over the past five years. Having fallen for the first time in a decade in 2023, the overall prize fund fell for a second successive year. For all the company's guff about the figures 'reinforcing the product's long-standing appeal as a unique and secure savings choice', they're clearly worried. The number of prizes awarded last year was up more than 53 per cent and that followed a 31 per cent rise the previous year. There was an even bigger jump in the value of those prizes – 89 per cent last year on top of a 51 per cent rise in 2023 – bringing them to a level not seen since 2012. You talk about changes in the prize structure but those are not that recent. They date back to October 2023 and in fact the number of prizes on offer has increased sharply in recent years as you can see above. The key factor affecting the number of prizes is not the headline figure for prizes at each level but the interest rate that determines the size of the prize fund. This is currently 1 per cent – hardly over generous but almost three times the 0.35 per cent rate that applied immediately before October 2023. The other factor, obviously, is the size of the fund and that, as the figures show, is falling in recent years. Essentially, 1 per cent of the fund is given in prizes each year. As the top prizes – €500 and above – are set, the real difference is in the number of €75 prizes drawn each week. So, what are your odds? With 713.6 million prize bonds in issue at the end of last year, your chances of winning a prize in any draw is comfortably more than 20,000/1 – on the basis of the minimum investment in bonds of €25 for four €6.25 bonds. Winning the weekly jackpot is a 178.4 million-to-one shot. For comparison, the chances of winning the jackpot in the Lotto since 2015 when it was expanded to 47 numbers is one in 10.74 million – although, in fairness, as least you do not lose your stake with the prize bonds. Clearly, the more bonds you hold, the better the odds, though they are still fairly daunting. If you don't win, you do have the right to get your investment back at full face value but it will be worth less than when you bought those bonds due to inflation. Inflation over the past five years in Ireland means that the €25 you choose to withdraw this year by redeeming that minimum level of prize bond investment is worth just €20.20 in buying power – barely 80 per cent of what it was if you bought those bonds back in 2020. If you bought the bonds back in 2000, your €25 is worth just under €15 in terms of 2025 prices. So for the hundreds of thousands of bondholders who do not win a prize, this is a poor investment. If that gives the impression that I'm not a massive fan, you'd be right. Unless you are averse to taking any level of risk at all, you'd be better looking elsewhere. Even the risk-averse can get a better return on their cash with other State Savings options – unless they're lucky, and then we're back to the Lotto analogy. Oversight As to oversight, the Prize Bond Company is apparently a joint venture between An Post and Fexco to run the scheme on behalf of the State – or more precisely the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) , which is the State agency charged with managing the State's debt. An official from the NTMA oversees each weekly draw, which is done electronically – with the numbers generated randomly – and the results of those draws are apparently then analysed by another company that specialises in statistical and data validation, according to the Prize Bond Company. At the time of writing, the most recent draw was the last weekly draw in June when there were a total of 8,823 prize-winners who shared almost €1.24 million in prizes. Obviously this was skewed by the monthly €500,000 win. The prize fund in other weekly draws is just shy of €740,000. Once a month (the final draw of the month), there is one winner of €500,000, as you say. Otherwise, there is a weekly winner of €50,000, 20 winners of €1,000 each, and another 20 who get €500. After that there is a much larger number of winners of €75. How many precisely is based on the size of the price bond fund. As of now, it is 8,781 winners each week. Prizes are paid into your bank account if that is the option you have chosen or, as a default, used to purchase more prize bonds. Part of the issue, especially for people with small holdings of prize bonds, is that they are passive investments, rarely looked at. The Prize Bond Company does notify winners by post and, more recently, by email but if you have not updated your details with the Prize Bond Company – and especially if the bonds were acquired before email details were relevant – any information about winnings may have gone to a long-irrelevant address and the bin. This is especially true, I'm guessing, for people who were not active buyers of bonds but who received them instead as gifts from family. Clearly, that group does not include you but, for other readers, that is why it is important if you own prize bonds to make sure the operators have your correct details. You can find and download a change of address/change of name form here . What happens any unclaimed prizes? After six months, they are put in a special fund of unclaimed prizes. A winning bondholder can still claim that prize at any time. At the end of last year, there was €3.4 million in unclaimed prizes. That might sound like a lot but when you consider that €45.6 million was issued in prizes last year alone and that the unclaimed prize fund dates back to 1957, it's clear the vast majority of prizes do find their way to the bond owners. You can check with the Prize Bond Company by phone or online and the site also has a Check My Numbers feature although this can be a little more finicky. So is it worth the investment? The bottom line is that the State is paying just 1 per cent 'interest' for 'borrowing' the money you pay for the prize bonds. And unless you're a winner, you're not even getting the benefit of any part of that 1 per cent. Please send your queries to Dominic Coyle, Q&A, The Irish Times, 24-28 Tara Street, Dublin 2, or by email to , with a contact phone number. This column is a reader service and is not intended to replace professional advice
Extra.ie
5 hours ago
- Extra.ie
How DJ Carey conned cash from real cancer victim
Shamed hurling legend DJ Carey 'preyed' on a cancer patient during her 'most vulnerable moment' and conned her into giving him thousands of euros after falsely claiming he was suffering from the same disease. The woman's husband claimed Carey, who this week pleaded guilty to 10 charges of defrauding people out of money while pretending to have cancer, 'groomed' the couple as they were trying to cope with their own health crisis. And can reveal it was this couple who first blew the whistle on the five-time All-Ireland winner's heartless scam, whose many victims include the businessman Denis O'Brien. In an interview granted on condition of anonymity, the cancer patient's husband revealed the bombshell moment they realised they were not the only ones conned by Carey. Catriona Carey. Pic: Colin Keegan/Collins Dublin It was while watching an RTÉ documentary about the former hurler's convicted fraudster sister, Catriona Carey, that they realised others could be swindled unless they did something. The cancer patient's husband told 'There was a Prime Time programme about Catriona Carey on the telly and his MO [modus operandi] seemed to be the same. 'He was so good. You're talking the Talented Mr Ripley here. He was juggling balls and living up a lot. It was a calculated approach. He was so good in his grooming. He was brilliant. It was the work of an artist, and he was consistent even to the end. 'When we saw the programme on the telly we said, 'this has to stop' and we came forward to stop it. We took our responsibilities seriously. And it has stopped. It's not easy to be a whistleblower and to stop fraud. You have to be brave. DJ Carey conned a real cancer victim by pretending he had the same disease. Pic: Colin Keegan/Collins Dublin 'People giving him money, these were acts of kindness and decency, and it wasn't reciprocated. We didn't come forward ultimately to see him punished or put behind bars. This had nothing to do with retribution. We came forward to stop it, and it has stopped.' DJ Carey is regarded as one of the country's greatest-ever hurlers, winning five All-Ireland titles with Kilkenny and nine All-Stars during a glittering sporting career. On Wednesday, the 54-year-old pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Court to 10 separate charges of defrauding people by pretending he had cancer. There were initially 21 charges against him, and 30 witnesses were due to give evidence about how they were defrauded over an eight-year period between 2014 and 2022. Dressed in a dark suit, Carey sat at the side of the courtroom and walked to the dock when his case was called. DJ Carey outside the CCJ. Pic: ©Fran Veale He stood with his hands clasped in front of him and replied 'guilty' as the court registrar read out details of each of the 10 charges. Judge Patricia Ryan remanded him on continuing bail for a sentencing hearing to take place on October 29. The court heard that victim-impact statements would be required. Carey's barrister also requested legal aid on behalf of his client to cover a psychological report that may be necessary, saying there were 'certain mental health issues'. Judge Ryan granted the application. Carey was not required to address the court again and left shortly after. No evidence was given this week about how much money the former hurler pocketed. However, some sources familiar with the case believe more than €1m was given to Carey under false pretences. Carey's legal team this week said their client has a 'genuine' heart condition and that he had mental health issues. But until the moment his lawyers indicated Carey would be pleading guilty to the changes, the sportsman had maintained his innocence. The husband of the woman battling a cancer diagnosis who was targeted by Carey said: 'He didn't co-operate until the very end. His legal team said he has a heart condition, and it's a little bit rich because he could have co-operated. He didn't co-operate; he was caught. 'He could have made an attempt to repay people… he was managing the situation right to the end.' The couple who blew the whistle on Carey's fake cancer extortion scam got to know him through business and their shared love of hurling. They were not particularly close, but he made a point of approaching the couple when he learned about their health crisis. The cancer patient's husband recalled: 'My wife was diagnosed with blood cancer in February 2021, and we were completely up the walls to be given a diagnosis. 'We were looking down the barrel of a gun, we didn't know where we were. Between diagnosis and treatment is the worse time. You are really vulnerable. He [Carey] heard about it on the grapevine, and he was Ambassador for Kilkenny Hurling at the time. I was on the field, and he made a beeline for me. 'He knew about the type of cancer my wife has, and he told me: 'That's what I have. There is hope.' He told me he was getting treatment through his elite sports status in the US. 'He mentioned where he was getting treatment in Seattle and a centre in Manchester. 'I wrote all this down in my phone and he asked could he meet my wife. He was extremely convincing. We were groomed and there was preying on our vulnerability.' At the time, the former Kilkenny hurler was living in a luxury home on the grounds of the five-star Mount Juliet Estate, where the woman diagnosed with cancer occasionally frequented. 'A few weeks after meeting him, he met my wife and he mentioned to her about going for a coffee.' Afterwards, her husband said, the text messages started to ping on her phone. Within weeks, she received a message looking for money. The retired sportsman was desperate. He needed urgent treatment. But unless he had money by the weekend, he would lose his slot at an American hospital. Carey assured the cancer patient that his elite sports status cover would kick in at the end of the month, and he assured her he would repay the money then. But once the four-figure sum was transferred, he became elusive. He was in hospital having treatment. He could not talk because he was in hospital. Rest assured, she would get her money when he got home at the weekend. But as the months passed and the money never materialised, the real-life cancer patient became convinced Carey was 'faking' his cancer. Eventually, she threatened to go public unless he paid back the money in full. Her husband said Carey called to the house a short time later with the money. Despite their ordeal, the couple say they are fortunate they were able to recover their money. Others were not so lucky. Although Carey has only pleaded guilty to 10 charges of fraud, the couple's case is among 21 charges Judge Ryan will be asked to consider when sentencing Carey on October 29. Thirteen of his named victims include Denis O'Brien, Noel Tynan, Owen and Ann Conway, Mark and Sharon Kelly, Aidan Mulligan, Tony Griffin and Christy Browne, Thomas Butler, Jeffrey Howes, Edwin Carey and Aonghus Leydon. In spite of the stress Carey caused the couple, the cancer patient's husband said: 'I don't feel any bitterness towards the chap. I don't have any of that in me. We were codded and got our money back. It's a very sad tale. It's the fall of a sporting idol. The man was like a god in Kilkenny. 'I'm sad for him, I'm sad for his kids, I'm sad for his ex-wife. He targeted people who he knew had some money, and the money was given in goodwill and in the belief that his story was true.' The man, who said his wife is responding well to her cancer treatment, added: 'Giving the money was an act of decency, and the breach of trust is greater because we all gave that money to someone we thought was in dire need. Cancer or any fake use of cancer for gain should be off-limits, and he did cross that line. It's shocking. It's despicable to do that.'
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
Expect plenty of cribbin' and moanin' as the budget games begin
The budget games are under way, right enough. Impending decisions about spending priorities for next year and into the future are now the unavoidable context of every political exchange – especially those within Government , some of which you'll see, most of which you won't. They are the subtext of every interview, news story and speech between now and October. As ever, the management of expectations at the centre is essential at this stage. At the recent National Economic Dialogue Paschal Donohoe solemnly warned of deep uncertainty about the future and that (inconveniently) positive headline economic figures so far this year mask 'considerable vulnerabilities'. 'The mood music is changing,' Donohoe warned. His party leader saw 'dark clouds on the horizon'. For the Taoiseach , 'challenging,' was the mot juste. In the Dáil this week, Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers returned to the theme. READ MORE 'We face significant economic uncertainty,' he said. 'Everyone in this House needs to realise the level and degree of ... corporate risks that exists right now.' As the Bert used to say during the late stage hubris of the Celtic Tiger, sure this is all cribbin' and moanin' and talkin' down the country. Still, you can see what they're at. The country and its political system have become accustomed to massive giveaway budgets, and cannot contemplate restraint. Well, let me qualify that thought: everyone can contemplate restraint, just not for themselves. Everyone has a demand for extra spending, sourced from the public purse. Some have a good case; all believe they deserve priority. Much of our media – especially RTÉ – is in the habit of promoting the causes of all comers relentlessly and uncritically. Of course, RTÉ might feel a special affinity with bodies looking for money from the Government. But still. Some context would not go amiss – how much would this cost? What is the existing budget? Where might the money come from? What should not be done in order to pay for this? What taxes should be increased? The list of supplicants for greater public funding is literally unending. A casual glance at a political correspondent's inbox gives a flavour of the requests bombarding the budget ministers: extra provision for education for people with disabilities; extra funding for school capitation; VAT cuts for the embattled hospitality industry; a €25 per week increase in welfare rates; this week's cause celebre – retaining the €1,000 discount on fees for third level students; and so on, and so on. [ The Irish Times view on college fees: Government has a choice to make Opens in new window ] Minister for Justice Jim O'Callaghan played a more subtle hand. Speaking at the Free Legal Advice Centre in Dublin, he said it was clear that Ireland has 'a big problem' with domestic violence. He would like to provide more resources for Flac and for civil legal aid – but 'I'm limited in terms of budget'. He is getting to the heart of the entire question of budgeting: it's all a question of priorities. Few people would quibble with increasing the budget for legal aid to ensure that people can have access to justice and to the protection of the law, when that question is taken in isolation. But governments cannot take any of these questions in isolation – they must weigh it all up as part of a coherent and credible whole of Government budgetary plan. Within the justice budget, for example, how does that measure up as a priority against recruiting more gardaí? Or fixing the problem of prison overcrowding? Or supporting the victims of crime? Or rehabilitating young people who have fallen into criminality? And how should the justice allocation be compared to the other budgets within Government? Should justice be constrained so that we can spend more money on health? On disabilities? On child poverty? Not so simple now, is it? And, yes, you might want to do all these things. But you can't. Anyone who pretends you can isn't being straight. You have to choose. Now let's not feel too bad for Messers Donohoe and Chambers. It may be hard being in charge of budgets during a time of plenty, but it's better than being Rachel Reeves . As the tears rolled down Reeves' cheeks in the House of Commons on Wednesday, both sterling and the UK's standing in the bond markets were headed in the same direction. Whatever the problems of prosperity that Jack and Paschal have to manage, they are far, far preferable to the other kind of problem, now facing Reeves and her prime minister. Better to have surpluses than deficits. So you might think that an overriding national priority would be to maintain steady and stable public finances. To do that, the budget ministers and the leaders of the Government parties have decided, they must eliminate the once-off giveaways of the last three budgets. 'We can't and we won't' continue with them, Donohoe told Ivan Yates on Newstalk on Thursday. But how firm is that determination? My sense is that Donohoe's is rock solid. He is not, however, in charge of the Government. Both Simon Harris and Micheál Martin, while ruling out another goody basket of one-off giveaways, have insisted that they will also seek to help people with rising costs in the budget. Does this signal a middle ground will be found? This week's controversy over student fees shows just how hard it is to withdraw benefits to which voters have become accustomed. Does the Government have the political will and the capacity to restrain itself and take politically difficult but necessary decisions to position the country for future growth and to protect it against future adversity – or will we cross our fingers, plough on and hope for the best? We'll see. But I know one thing: the politics of no hard choices never, ever ends well.
