THE HIGH Court is to rule later this month on an application to have video evidence heard from Budapest from absconded solicitor Michael Lynn.
Mr Justice Frank Clarke deferred a ruling on the matter after it was raised during an ongoing case involving the Cunningham Group and First Active.
The Cunningham Group has asked the court to accept video evidence from Mr Lynn, who does not want to return here to give evidence in person because there is a High Court warrant for his arrest. He is wanted for questioning about running up tens of millions of euro in bank debts.
Mr Lynn gave advice to the Cunningham Group prior to its going into receivership.
As part of the case in favour of such a move the court has been told that the film director Roman Polanski was allowed to give video-link evidence from Paris to a trial in London because he was afraid that if he travelled to England he would be extradited to the US, where he is wanted in relation to charges of having sex with an under-age girl.
Yesterday Donal O'Donnell SC, for the bank, described the application as "both novel and startling" and argued that it should not be acceded to.
Mr O'Donnell said that to allow Mr Lynn to give evidence in the circumstances would be "two or three steps up the register of affront to the public confidence and conscience because [whereas] Mr Polanski feared a possible warrant which did not then exist for his extradition, Mr Lynn fears an existing warrant and, as it happens, an existing investigation for breach of the domestic Irish criminal code, but in particular a warrant which is in existence issued by the court . . . from which he seeks the order, that warrant having itself been issued because of his refusal to come and attend and give evidence".
The application that Mr Lynn be allowed give evidence by video-link was deficient in fact and misconceived in law, he said.
The court has been told Mr Lynn has said he is prepared to give evidence in Budapest by live video-link.
The case was adjourned yesterday to Monday July 21st. Mr Justice Clarke invited parties to, in the meantime, make written submissions on whether the Polanski case had been adopted or commented on in other jurisdictions. He would give his response to the application at some stage after the resumption of the case, he said.
