€310k defamation award to former Kildare footballer should be overturned, appeal court hears

Mr Justice Tony O'Connor found, among other things, the newspaper was reckless as to whether the details and suggestions in the articles were accurate or true.

However, he dismissed an additional claim by Mr Nolan concerning breach of privacy rights from circulation of photos attending parties.

The Sunday World appealed both the finding of defamation and the amount of the award. Mr Nolan opposed the appeal and cross appealed in relation to the privacy finding.

Today, a three judge Court of Appeal reserved its decision.

Rossa Fanning SC, for the paper publisher Sunday Newspapers, said it was their case the trial judge was in error because his decision was made either on no evidence or in contravention of the evidence before him.

Tabloid journalism may not be to everyone's taste, and is frequently lurid and sometimes distasteful, but it is inextricably connected with the constitutional right to freedom of expression, he said.

The trial judge formed an "exceptionally negative view" of the newspaper and a favourable view of Mr Nolan which was not warranted, he said.

Counsel said the judge made reference to the fact that Mr Nolan, after attending four parties, stopped doing so because he found them distasteful.

This was "extraordinary" in light of the photographs taken and the fact it took Mr Nolan 18 months to find the parties not to his taste.

The objective facts of the case was that Mr Nolan had been convicted in 2002 of money laundering having got mixed up with notorious gangsters, he said. He had been working as a mortgage broker, lost that work and got into landscape gardening and more recently in car parking at Dublin Airport.

When he was approached by a journalist before the first article was published he claimed initially he only went to one party, then admitted going to two and also offered to reveal the names of others at he parties if the paper did not print his name, counsel said.

It was the paper's case that, although there was an error in saying Mr Nolan was an organiser of the party, the only issue the judge could have made out in relation to that was that he had helped organise swingers' parties given his relationship with his girlfriend who did organise them.

The amount of the award should be overturned on grounds including Mr Nolan caused or contributed to his own misfortune and that the trial judge failed to have "any regard to the admitted facts".

Jim O'Callaghan SC, for Mr Nolan, said the trial judge should be give a certain discretion in relation to the evidence he heard as distinct from dealing with the case on basis of transcript of the High Court hearing as the appeal court was doing.

If there was ever a case where one benefited from hearing evidence, it was this one. Although there were only two witnesses, the appeal court did not hear the impact of Mr Nolan speaking of suicide or the conservation when he was doorstepped the journalist in 2012.

Mr Nolan begged the journalist not to publish because he would lose his two children, who he had sole custody of. His wife later took them away for six months and their names were changed to get them into new schools.

His side completely rejected that there was no difference between attending an organising the parties because one involves a criminal offence of organising prostitution.

Counsel said the paper's claim that the articles enjoyed the protection of privilege under the Defamation Act was "unstateable" and should not be given any credibility.

The amount of damages, in relation to general, aggravated and punitive, should not be interfered with. The Sunday World "got off very lightly", he said.

The court was also urged by Mr O'Callaghan to overturn the privacy finding while Mr Fanning said it should stand.