The Supreme Court has rejected Hazel Lawlor’s attempt to require the planning tribunal to apply the criminal standard of proof before making serious findings against her late husband, former TD and Dublin county councillor Liam Lawlor.
Lawlor died in a road traffic accident in Russia in October 2005. He had been involved with the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments since 1998, including its Carrickmines and Quarryvale modules. Allegations made to the tribunal included claims that he had received payments connected with planning matters. No findings had been made against him when the proceedings were brought.
His widow argued that any finding of serious misconduct should have to be established beyond reasonable doubt. She relied on the gravity of the allegations, their potential impact on his reputation, his death and the absence of an appeal from tribunal findings.
The Supreme Court dismissed that argument. It held that a tribunal is an inquisitorial fact-finding body, not a criminal court, and cannot convict or punish anyone. The criminal standard therefore does not automatically apply.
However, the court stressed that this did not allow grave findings to be made lightly. The evidence required must be proportionate to the seriousness of the allegation. A finding involving serious wrongdoing or reputational damage must be supported by cogent evidence of appropriate weight.
The court also rejected Lawlor’s request that the tribunal provide money in advance for legal representation. It held that the statutory power to award tribunal costs arises only after findings have been made and does not permit advance funding. The court also noted that no evidence of Lawlor’s financial means or of the value of her husband’s estate had been produced.
Both grounds of appeal were dismissed. The court further held that any entitlement to relief had in any event been lost through delay because Liam Lawlor had not challenged these matters during his lifetime.