COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANT Monica Leech has undertaken before the High Court to pay fees sought by lawyers who acted for her in a number of libel actions.
The president of the High Court, Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, heard yesterday there had been a breakdown in the relationship between Ms Leech and her legal team over advice and fees.
McCann FitzGerald, the law firm which represented her in the actions, including an action in June 2009 when Ms Leech was awarded €1.87 million in libel damages over a series of Evening Herald articles in 2004, secured permission to “come off record” for Ms Leech (cease representing her).
The application arose because of “an irretrievable breakdown” in the relationship between Ms Leech and the solicitors, David Holland SC, for McCann FitzGerald, said.
Ms Leech told the judge yesterday she had the money to pay the fees and she provided an undertaking to do so.
In an affidavit from Ms Leech read to the court by Mr Holland, she said she felt the solicitors were more interested in the fees than the outcome of the case.
Counsel said that claim was strongly denied by McCann FitzGerald. Mr Holland also said Ms Leech’s suggestion now that she had the funds to pay was “a novelty” and contrary to what she had asserted to the solicitors over a period of time.
The court heard the firm represented Ms Leech in three separate libel actions against the Independent Newspapers group.
The first related to articles in the Evening Herald. That case is under appeal to the Supreme Court on the question of the size of the award only.
At the time, the High Court had directed Ms Leech be paid €750,000, plus €100,000 costs, as a condition of the newspaper getting permission to appeal.
That money had been paid to Ms Leech, the court heard.
The second action, against the Irish Independent, was unsuccessful but Ms Leech herself is appealing against that ruling. The appeal has yet to be heard.
The third libel action is against the Sunday Independent but that case has yet to be heard.
Yesterday, Mr Holland said there had been a breakdown in the relationship between his clients and Ms Leech which primarily related to Ms Leech’s willingness to accept the advice given to her by her legal advisers but was also over fees.
As a result, from some time ago, Ms Leech had retained other solicitors which performed certain services on her behalf but did not come “on record” for her, he said.
Ms Leech, who was in court with her husband, represented herself in the High Court yesterday.
In her affidavit, Ms Leech said she felt McCann FitzGerald was pressurising her into paying costs even though the case was under appeal.
She was concerned the solicitors were more interested in the fees than the case.
Mr Holland said his clients were concerned that, apart from repeatedly saying she was unable to pay the fees, Ms Leech had refused to give a specific type of undertaking which would have secured their payment.
Asked by Mr Justice Kearns if she was willing to give an undertaking to the court to pay the fees, she said she was prepared to do so.
The judge said McCann FitzGerald could come off record and ordered that Ms Leech be furnished with a bill of costs from the firm and the files on her cases be handed over to her or her new lawyers.
He noted she had undertaken she would pay the fees forthwith for the various sets of proceedings and they would be taxed (ruled on) in default of agreement.
The judge told Ms Leech that failure to abide with her undertaking could have consequences, including an application by McCann FitzGerald to have her held in contempt of court.
