Michael Lynn launches appeal against payment of legal costs

High Court reporters

Jailed former solicitor Michael Lynn has brought a High Court challenge against a refusal by the Department of Justice to pay his lawyers for certain work carried out during the course of his lengthy criminal trial.

Lynn, who is currently detained at Mountjoy Prison, was sentenced to five-and-a-half years in jail earlier this year after he was found guilty of stealing €17.9 million from six financial institutions by taking out multiple mortgages on the same properties.

Lynn, with an address at Redcross, Co Wicklow, claims the Department has refused to pay costs incurred by his solicitors when reviewing thousands of pages of documents in his criminal trial.

The process in question is known as 'Review of Disclosure'.

Lynn claims that the trial involved voluminous disclosure of thousands of documents and vast amounts of financial material from financial institutions. Lynn was convicted following a retrial after the jury hearing his original prosecution in 2022 failed to reach a verdict.

It is estimated that the material in question took some 150,000 hours to review. Lynn, the court also heard, had a different set of solicitors represent him in the retrial as the previous solicitors were unable to act in the retrial.

Lynn claims the refusal to pay these costs regarding the review of disclosure amounts to a breach to his constitutional rights to a fair trial, and his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Represented in his High Court Judicial Review action by Mark Lynam SC, instructed by Mulholland Law, Lynn seeks reliefs, including an order quashing the Department's refusal, and that the matter be remitted back for fresh consideration.

The Director of Public Prosecutions is a notice party to the action.

Counsel said thousands of additional material, over 9000 pages of documents, that was not included in the batch of documents disclosed during the first trial had to be reviewed as part of the retrial.

In addition, a large number of copies of documents ing the defence case also had to be produced during the retrial.

Counsel said the Department has also refused to pay for the costs of his client's solicitor having to provide some 30 copies of that material.

Counsel added the Department had said in 2023 during exchanges over the issue that it would not pay for any further review of disclosed materials and that, as he is a qualified solicitor, Lynn "could review the materials himself".

Counsel said that was not an appropriate nor rational response to the application to have his costs covered.

Lynn also seeks declarations including that the Department has erred in law and fact, acted irrationally in refusing the applicant's application.

The matter came before Ms Justice Niamh Hyland on Monday, who granted Lynn's lawyers permission, on an ex-parte basis, to bring his challenge.

The matter will return before the court next month.