Injunction granted restraining Gavin Pepper from filming home of Pepper Finance boss
The High Court injunctions against Independent Dublin city councillor Gavin Pepper (who has no connection to Pepper Finance) also restrain such activity against members of Ian Wigglesworth's family. The managing director has five children, including one with Down syndrome, who was visibly upset after being recently filmed playing outside his home.
The injunctions also prohibit Mr Pepper from obstructing, harassing, threatening, pursuing or intimidating Mr Wigglesworth and his family, who live in a Dublin housing estate.
Cllr Pepper, of Plunkett Green, Finglas, Dublin, must also remove social media posts which contain video footage taken outside Mr Wigglesworth's home.
READ MORE
Brian Conroy SC, for Mr Wigglesworth and Pepper Finance, said Cllr Pepper has a well established association with the far right and social media posts promoting far-right ideas.
This injunction application, brought on a one-side-only represented (ex parte) basis, was urgent in the context of recent events, he said, adding that his clients were concerned about the possibility of such events becoming more serious.
Mr Wigglesworth, in a sworn statement, said Cllr Pepper has engaged in a series of threats and acts of intimidation against him and Pepper Finance.
On July 25th, he arrived at Mr Wigglesworth's family home, set up a video camera with tripod and began filming his family, including his son with Down syndrome.
It was particularly distressing that Cllr Pepper sought to disparage his son in a recent social media post which was published on X, Facebook and Instagram, he said.
A second defendant in the case is David Rafferty, of Plunkett Green in Finglas, Dublin, who holds a mortgage account with Pepper Finance.He has admitted to disseminating personal information about Mr Wigglesworth, including his address.
He is sued arising from the sequence of events that followed but there was no application for an injunction against him.
Cllr Pepper has published a total of 14 social media posts in relation to Mr Wigglesworth and his company. The posts are offensive, defamatory, threatening and replete with misinformation, Mr Wigglesworth said.
In Cllr Pepper's first post on June 12th, he signalled his intention to attend the homes of named people.
On July 25th, he threatened to camp outside Mr Wigglesworth's home if he didn't 'come to the table' in relation to the interest rates Pepper Finance charges.
In commentary with his posts, Cllr Pepper said he had 'all the information about the staff' at Pepper Finance and another company. This prompted threatening comments from other social media posts.
Mr Justice Brian Cregan also ordered Cllr Pepper be restrained from publishing the staff's addresses.
He said he would deal with the issue of extending the injunctions to Pepper Finance itself when the case returns on Thursday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Overseas deployment of Irish troops should require independent legal advice, committee advises
Independent legal advice should be commissioned in advance of any overseas mission by Irish troops if the Government proceeds with plans to modify the 'triple lock' method of sanctioning deployment, an Oireachtas committee has found. A report from the Joint Committee on Defence and National Security argues for a strengthening of legal and Oireachtas oversight of Defence Forces activities abroad. It contends that the Oireachtas should have to vote on a regular basis to renew the mandate for deployment. The Defence (Amendment) Bill 2025, which is undergoing pre-legislative scrutiny, removes the requirement for a United Nations mandate when deploying a contingent of 12 or more troops outside the State as part of an international force. UN Security Council approval is one aspect of the 'triple lock' consent mechanism, which also requires a Dáil vote and government decision. The matter has become a topic of heated debate within the political system, with the Opposition arguing removal of UN Security Council endorsement represents a dilution of Irish neutrality. Opposition parties have accused the Government of wanting to step away from the traditional policy and towards a more liberal approach of sending troops overseas. READ MORE The Government argues the current system allows for an effective veto by the council's permanent members, such as Russia and China. No new peacekeeping mandate has been approved by the council since 2014. The legislation would also allow for the deployment of up to 50 troops without a supporting Dáil resolution. The Oireachtas committee, which was undertaking pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill, will publish its report on Wednesday afternoon. It recommends that 'at minimum, there be a formal legal review of any proposed deployment, undertaken by an independent body'. At regular intervals during a deployment the government should need a 'renewed mandate' for the mission via a majority Dáil and government vote, and another formal legal review, it says. Within 12 months of a deployment, a Dáil resolution should be sought for it to continue, it advises. The legislation should also allow the Dáil, Seanad or the Oireachtas defence committee to request an 'urgent review' of deployments. [ Sinn Féin wants 111 changes to Bill reforming 'triple lock' Irish troop deployment Opens in new window ] Opposition sources are claiming as a victory the lack of a recommendation within the report to remove the triple lock. However, neither does it contain a recommendation to retain it in its current form. In her foreword to the report, committee chair Rose Conway-Walsh, of Sinn Féin, said nothing within the triple lock 'deters the Irish government from addressing the legacy of neglect of our Defence Forces'. She said Opposition members, several witnesses and 'hundreds of submissions' from the public were 'deeply concerned that this proposed legislation would present a threat to our neutrality', while Government members and other witnesses said it would have no impact. The report outlines that evidence on this aspect of the Bill 'has been extensive but also often contradictory'. The legislation contains provisions regarding the management of Defence Forces members charged with or convicted of serious criminal offences. These include options for their suspension from duty and new procedures to be followed during suspensions.
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Sisters of rapist Richard Brennan want witnesses in trials to get paid leave from work
The sisters of a man who sexually abused them have called for reform of the legal system over leave for witnesses in trials. At the Central Criminal Court earlier this month Richard Brennan was given a sentence of eight years for offences against his three sisters in the 1970s and 1980s in Dublin . Brennan, with an address in Montana in the US, admitted days into his trial last March to 24 offences against Yvonne Crist, Paula Fay and Catherine Wrightstone. Now Ms Fay and Ms Wrightstone have called for witnesses to be given paid leave, the same as jurors, in trials. READ MORE Speaking on RTÉ Radio 1's Oliver Callan show, Ms Fay said when she told her employer she was going to be a witness in a trial and that it could take three weeks she was told all she was entitled to was annual leave or unpaid leave. 'There was nothing in law to protect me as a witness,' she said. 'I was completely committed to this process from the very beginning, and I feel that we need to be treated differently.' Ms Fay said witnesses, like jurors, were also doing their civic duty and as such should be treated the same as them. The abuse was committed by Brennan in the family home in Rathfarnham when he was aged between 16 and 24 and included four offences of rape against Ms Fay and two of rape against Ms Wrightstone when both women were minors. Following the trial the sisters voiced their 'deep disappointment' over the 'leniency' of his eight-year sentence. Speaking on the show, Ms Wrightstone said: 'I think Irish courts seem to have broad discretion over such cases as ours and lenient sentences, especially in historical sexual abuse cases, are sometimes justified on the basis of remorse, time elapsed. 'In terms of reform, I would love to see an introduction of mandatory binding sentencing guidelines that treat sexual abuse and rape as serious offences regardless of the time elapsed and create a statutory offence under sexual assault for sibling sexual abuse.' During sentencing, Mr Justice David Keane said among the mitigatory factors were Brennan's 'very late' plea of guilty, his apology to his sisters, his expression of remorse, his lack of previous convictions, that the offences occurred 40 years ago and that he was considered at low risk of reoffending. Ms Wrightstone told the radio show that 'one of the things that I find a little bit disturbing is the offender's recent good character as stated in character references provided by family and friends, who only know what that person allows them to know'. She said she and her sisters were trying to 'give voice' for those who could not come forward. 'We understand that it's a really challenging thing to do. We want to provide hope, that our legal system will help and that the gardaí will help and that hopefully other changes will happen,' she said. 'But we do recognise that there have been some that have lost their life under the weight of trauma, so we're here to give voice to those and we thank all of those brave women that came before us.'
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
St Stephen's Green shopping centre plan is shot down by planning appeals board
A €100 million plan to redevelop St Stephen's Green Shopping Centre in Dublin has been turned down by An Coimisiún Pleanála . The refusal overturns a grant of permission owners DTDL Ltd secured from Dublin City Council in December 2023. An Coimisiún Pleanála said the proposed scheme 'lacks a strong sense of original aesthetic and would not achieve a sufficiently high standard of placemaking, urban design and architecture at this key city centre location'. It concluded the scheme would be contrary to a number of policies in the area of high quality architecture, architectural design and brownfield, regeneration sites and large scale development of the Dublin City Development Plan 2022-28. An Coimisiún Pleanála noted these policies 'aim to encourage innovative, high quality urban design and architectural detail in all new development proposals, that positively contribute to the city's built and natural environment and incorporate exemplar standards of high-quality, sustainable and inclusive urban design and architecture befitting the city's environment and heritage'. The planning appeals board concluded that the proposed development would be contrary to the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The largest component of the new scheme was to be 35,043 sq metres of offices and ancillary spaces. The applicants also increased the level of retail and food and beverage space after the Council expressed concerns. An Coimisiún Pleanála upheld a recommendation by its own inspector in the case to refuse planning permission. However, it said it did not share the view expressed by the inspector that the existing shopping centre represents an exemplar twentieth century building. Opening the door for a future application, the board concluded that replacing the existing facade, including the existing external trellis detailing and dome, would not contravene the city's development plan, subject to an appropriately high quality 'design solution for this key city centre location'. Appeals by An Taisce, shopping centre trader Emmett Rogers and activist Frank had seen the plan come before the appeals board. The An Taisce appeal – jointly signed off by Dublin City Planning Officer, Kevin Duff and Heritage Officer, Ian Lumley – stated that what was predominantly a large office development 'lacks architectural sensitivity towards St Stephen's Green and results in the loss of an impressive naturally lit space'. Mr Rogers, who has been operating the Tribe outlet at the shopping centre since 1992, said if the redevelopment proceeded, 'I see Dublin losing another bit of its unique identity to developers'. Mr McDonald said the proposal was 'simply not good enough and does not qualify as a building of 'exceptional design and outstanding architectural quality' '. The redevelopment plan was first lodged in January 2023. In an architectural design statement, BKD architects said that, since opening in 1988, the centre had faced many difficulties attracting sustainable retailers for reasons including that most unit sizes were too small with units at the upper levels trading poorly and operating only on short-term leases. Planning consultants for the scheme, John Spain & Associates, told Dublin City Council that the existing building 'has become outdated'. It said the proposal sought to enhance a high quality shopping centre and office facility on a centrally located site.
