Defamation appeal case settled 10 minutes before Supreme Court was to issue judgement

In 2008, a High Court jury awarded him €900,000 over a 1999 article describing him as a "Traveller drug king".

The story was carried after gardai seized IR£500,000 worth of cannabis and amphetamines in August, 1999, in Tubbercurry, Co Sligo and was published during Mr McDonagh’s seven day detention for questioning in connection with that seizure.

Mr McDonagh denied any involvement in drugs and was ultimately released without charge. He claimed the story tore up his family and led to him being shunned in Sligo.

The Sunday World denied libel and pleaded the article was true.

The newspaper appealed the jury award and a condition of being allowed appeal was that it would pay Mr McDonagh one-tenth (€90,000) of the award.

In 2015, the Court of Appeal ruled the jury decision was perverse and found that Mr McDonagh was a drug dealer.

Mr McDonagh then appealed to the Supreme Court which said the appeal court was incorrect and its order must be reversed in full.

As the Supreme Court was about to deliver its decision on whether the case should go back to the High Court, or whether it should substitute its own award for the €900,000, Declan Doyle SC, for Mr McDonagh said the case had been "settled ten minutes ago". He apologised to the court for putting it to so much work.

Asked by Chief Justice Susan Denham how long the case had been going on, Mr Doyle said 17 years. "And ten minutes ago you settle it", a clearly annoyed Chief Justice said.

After Mr Doyle, and Eoin McCullough SC, for the newspaper, asked that the judgment not be delivered, the court retired for a short time to consider what it would do.

When the court resumed, the Chief Justice said the court had decided to deliver its judgment which would be available later with the substituted award figure redacted.

All the judges said the €900,000 was excessive or disproportionate.

Chief Justice Denham said Mr McDonagh had a criminal record, evaded tax, made a settlement with the Criminal Assets Bureau and there was evidence at the trial, which was not disputed, in relation to Mr McDonagh and drugs.

He did not enjoy a good reputation and while this did not give a licence to defame him, those matters were relevant to the assessment of damages, she said.

She was satisfied a fair, reasonable and proportionate award would be much nearer the figure which had been proposed by the newspaper (€75,000).

Mr Justice Donal O’Donnell, who agreed with the Chief Justice, said the €75,000 figure provided considerable support for the assessment to which his colleagues had come although, for his part, he would have given some consideration to a lower figure.

Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne, Mr Justice Peter Charleton and Ms Justice Iseult O’Malley agreed with the Chief Justice.

Mr Justice William McKechnie said in his written judgment before the settlement was announced he had said "this case is a mess". He had decided the only course was for a re-trial.

"Whilst I am relieved that matters have been resolved, the fact it took almost 18 years to do so and was arrived at only minutes before judgment was due is added testament to the view I have just expressed".

In light of his conclusion that the failure of the jury to answer one of the questions on the issue paper it was presented with was vital to the case, and in light of the "disproportionate damages award", he was satisfied the case must go back for retrial on all issues.

Mr Justice John MacMenamin agreed with Mr Justice McKechnie.