The High Court has ordered a solicitor for a wife in divorce proceedings to provide an affidavit explaining legal-fee payments and related matters, after the judge identified concerns that required clarification. The court did not make findings on whether the wife breached an earlier order or undertaking.
The order was made by Mr Justice Twomey on 26 October 2017 during an interlocutory hearing in the divorce case brought by the husband. The wife is seeking financial provision. The husband had sought broad discovery of documents about her legal costs, as well as access to recordings of hearings before a High Court judge and the Taxing Master.
The judge said the existing record raised questions about the costs of the wife’s judicial separation, the payments made to her solicitors, a payment to accountants, and her decision not to challenge the legal bill during taxation. The Taxing Master had reduced the separation bill by €127,000, leaving about €508,000. The High Court had rejected the husband’s application to review that taxation decision, which was then under appeal.
An earlier order allowed the wife to pay €200,000 to her legal advisers on account, pending taxation. Evidence from the husband, which the judgment said had not been controverted, showed payments of €200,000 in August 2011, €260,000 in December 2011, €100,000 in September 2013 and €76,822.48 in March 2016. The wife’s solicitor said funds placed in the firm’s client account remained the wife’s money. The judge noted an apparent inconsistency between that explanation and the wife’s affidavit of means, and said it required clarification.
The judgment also examined how a €36,656.95 invoice from Peelo & Partners was described in submissions during the earlier taxation review. The judge said the submissions gave the impression the wife had paid the accountants directly, while the solicitor later said the payment was made from the firm’s client account. He said this issue also required clarification. The judge further noted that the wife had written that she did not wish to contest a bill she described as enough to make most people “gasp in horror”.
Rather than order the broad discovery sought, the court directed the wife’s solicitor, Clare Downes, to swear an affidavit within three weeks addressing the concerns. It must detail relevant fees paid since 22 July 2011, the source and current balance of any client-account funds, requests for those funds and related communications, and documents concerning the wife’s 6 March 2012 email and the costs or taxation. Legal advice may be redacted.
The court refused access to recordings of the Taxing Master hearings, finding them unnecessary to establish the amount spent. It also refused access to recordings of hearings before Mr Justice Reynolds, saying the husband had not shown that access was needed in the interests of justice. The divorce and financial-provision issues remained for a later hearing.