Verdict imminent in €1m defamation case after jury hear the closing speeches

The legal teams representing Chris Gordon and the Irish Racehorse Trainers Association (IRTA) made their closing speeches to the jury in the High Court on Tuesday where the issue of damages was brought up for the first time.

The long-running defamation case, which was initiated by Gordon, the IHRB's head of security, is conservatively estimated to have cost in excess of €1 million, and the loser will be expected to pay for those legal fees in their entirety.

It is expected that the jury will give a verdict on Wednesday afternoon, which marks day 30 and week number eight in the High Court for a case that stems from the much-contested stable inspection of Liz Doyle's premises on March 26, 2014, almost six years ago to the day.

In addressing the jury, SC John Rogers told the court on Tuesday morning that the onus of proving defamation rested entirely on the plaintiff’s shoulders, and suggested that Gordon and his legal team had failed to do so throughout the past eight weeks.

Gordon’s legal team, which is headed by SC Mark Harty, brought seven strands of alleged defamation by the IRTA.

Only one of those alleged counts of defamation, the petition as it was referred to in evidence, was removed from the questions sheet that was put to the jury.

It is Gordon’s belief that the IRTA led an orchestrated campaign to have him removed from his role within the IHRB in separate incidents stemming from the raid on Doyle’s yard.

The defendants claim qualified privilege, which if exercised without malice would make them immune from any acts of alleged defamation.

It is contended by SC Rogers and his legal team that at no stage did the defendants behave maliciously in defending their member.

SC Rogers explained to the jury: “If you had no honest belief, the law would say you were malicious, there was malice in what you did. That's the formula we use in asking you the question about malice.”

He added: “So, if you say, yes they [the IRTA] had no honest belief, then they are being malicious. You just need to get your heads around those questions. No honest belief and malice is critical to this entire case.”

SC Rogers went on to tell the court that the idea of an orchestrated campaign against Gordon was something that was entirely in the plaintiff’s head.

He reiterated this point when telling the court that Gordon “demonstrates a capacity again and again only to see things his way”.

SC Harty took less than an hour in addressing the jury, where he accused the IRTA of wilful blindness as well as behaving maliciously against his client.

The case is being heard by Mr Justice Bernard Barton and will continue at an earlier start time of 10.15am on Wednesday to make every effort for the jury to come to a conclusion on the same day.

Did you know you can bet via the Racing Post mobile app/website? Simply sign in with your favourite bookmaker via the Accounts button and then bet direct from our racecards