The High Court has declined to give effect to a request from a Denver court to take evidence from Sunday World journalist Nicola Tallant and Dialogue Ireland director Mr Garde in a dispute over an oil company share purchase.
In a judgment delivered on 18 September 2012, Mr Justice Hogan said the proposed evidence was relevant to a counterclaim in the Colorado proceedings. But he ruled that compelling either witness to answer questions about communications with sources would intrude on protected journalistic activity. He therefore refused the letters rogatory, the formal request for assistance from the foreign court.
The Colorado case arose from Jean Cornec’s claim that Susan Morrice owed him nearly US$13 million under an agreement to buy his shares in International Natural Energy LLC. Morrice’s counterclaim alleged that Cornec breached a non-disparagement clause by arranging for critical comments about her, the company and Tony Quinn to be supplied to media figures. These were allegations in the Colorado proceedings, not findings made in this Irish application.
Morrice sought evidence from Tallant and Garde about contacts with Cornec’s attorney, Katrina Skinner, and others before articles about the company appeared. Justice Hogan considered the witnesses’ evidence relevant to whether information had been supplied in breach of the agreement. He also ruled out questions about information supplied by the witnesses themselves, finding those inquiries irrelevant to the alleged breach.
The judge rejected arguments that the application was oppressive, including arguments based on separate defamation proceedings and Garde’s expertise on religious groups. He treated Garde as a witness to fact, rather than as an expert whose testimony would require substantial preparation.
However, the court weighed the witnesses’ interests against the value of the evidence to Morrice. It noted that material from US depositions and discovery already showed contacts before the September 2009 article, making the requested evidence confirmatory rather than essential. The case was a commercial dispute, and the questions would probe communications with sources. The judge concluded that the case for compelling Tallant’s evidence had not been convincingly established and held that Garde could likewise resist disclosure.
The ruling decided only whether Ireland should assist with the requested questioning. Justice Hogan did not decide the merits of the Colorado contract claim or counterclaim, and did not rule on how Colorado’s press freedom statute applied.