Latest news with #KeithOBrien
BreakingNews.ie
11-07-2025
- Business
- BreakingNews.ie
Judge satisfied with letter from law firm explaining 'no knowledge' of surveillance
A High Court judge has said he is satisfied with a letter from a law firm which explained how it wrote a letter to lawyers for a man at the centre of the business "spy" affair, saying its client had no knowledge of two cars alleged to have been surveilling the man and his family. Mr Justice Cregan had asked that his concerns should be addressed in relation to a letter written by Hayes Solicitors LLP, on behalf of its client global HR firm Deel Inc, saying they had no knowledge of the identities behind the registrations of two cars which had allegedly been following payroll manager Keith O'Brien to and from his home in Balrothery, north Dublin. Advertisement Mr O'Brien, who was employed in Dublin by Deel rival Rippling, admitted being paid €5,500 a month by Deel in return for trade secrets of his employer. He later apologised for the espionage and began cooperating with Rippling when it sued him, Deel and others. As a result, Rippling is not seeking any reliefs against him. Mr O'Brien brought his own proceedings alleging intimidation and harassment from surveillance by what were initially only "persons unknown" who were drivers/owners of two cars seen allegedly following him. Later, private investigation firms of Mark Murran, also known as Rock Investigations and Security, and Cliona Woods, trading as Gotham Services, became the defendants. They strongly deny any overt surveillance or claims of harassment and intimidation. Advertisement The Hayes letter on behalf of Deel denying knowledge of surveillance by two particular cars was sent in reply to a pre-litigation letter sent by Mr O'Brien's solicitor seeking that the surveillance should stop. During hearings before Mr Justice Cregan, he expressed his concern at the content of the Hayes letter, at one point saying it was either "a blatant lie or misrepresentation". This was after Deel had revealed it had commissioned "discreet" surveillance, and Hayes accepted the letter was incorrect but true at the time, according to the instructions it received. On Thursday, the judge said he had been unfair to Hayes but believed the matter could be resolved by Hayes simply writing another letter correcting the record. On Friday, Michael Cush SC, for Hayes, said his side had taken up the judge's suggestion and written the letter. Mr Cush said the letter explained Hayes had no independent knowledge that Deel had ordered surveillance, but once it informed the firm it had, it was brought to the attention of the court. Advertisement Mr Cush said he hoped the letter had the effect of satisfying the court and that Hayes at all times acted with absolute professionalism and integrity. The judge thanked Mr Cush for going to that trouble to resolve his concerns. Declan McGrath SC, for Deel, said from his client's perspective, an affidavit had been sworn by Jerome Soine, CEO of a Germany-based security firm, ISN International Security Network, apologising for what happened. Mr Soine said on making enquiries, his company was not aware of the identities of the car owners/drivers or that anyone had been retained by Ms Woods. Therefore, ISN told Deel they had not engaged the people using these particular vehicles. However, it subsequently transpired, following further information from Ms Woods, that one of the vehicles - the other was completely innocent and not involved in any surveillance - was involved. Mr Soine regretted he did not tell Deel sooner and apologised on behalf of ISN. Mr Justice Cregan said he thought that now resolved the matter.
Irish Times
11-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Judge satisfied with letter from law firm explaining ‘no knowledge' of surveillance
A High Court judge has said he is satisfied with a letter from a law firm which explained how it wrote a letter to lawyers for a man at the centre of the business 'spy' affair saying its client had no knowledge of two cars alleged to have been surveilling the man and his family. Mr Justice Cregan had asked that his concerns should be addressed in relation to a letter written by Hayes Solicitors LLP, on behalf of its client, global HR firm Deel Inc, saying they had no knowledge of the identities behind the registrations of two cars which had allegedly been following payroll manager Keith O'Brien to and from his home in Balrothery, north Dublin. Mr O'Brien, who was employed in Dublin by Deel rival Rippling, admitted being paid €5,500 a month by Deel in return for trade secrets of his employer. He later apologised for the espionage and began co-operating with Rippling when it sued him, Deel and others. As a result Rippling is not seeking any reliefs against him. READ MORE Mr O'Brien brought his own proceedings alleging intimidation and harassment from surveillance by what were initially only 'persons unknown' who were drivers/owners of two cars seen allegedly following him. Later, private investigation firms of Mark Murran, also known as Rock Investigations and Security, and Cliona Woods, trading as Gotham Services, became the defendants. They strongly deny any overt surveillance or claims of harassment and intimidation. The Hayes letter on behalf of Deel denying knowledge of surveillance by two particular cars was sent in reply to a pre-litigation letter sent by Mr O'Brien's solicitor seeking that the surveillance should stop. During hearings before Mr Justice Cregan, he expressed his concern at the content of the Hayes letter, at one point saying it was either 'a blatant lie or misrepresentation'. This was after Deel had revealed it had commissioned 'discreet' surveillance and Hayes accepted the letter was incorrect but true at the time according to the instructions it received. On Thursday, the judge said he had been unfair to Hayes but believed the matter could be resolved by Hayes simply writing another letter correcting the record. On Friday, Michael Cush SC, for Hayes, said his side had taken up the judge's suggestion and written the letter. Mr Cush said the letter explained Hayes had no independent knowledge that Deel had ordered surveillance but once it (Deel) informed the firm it had, it was brought to the attention of the court. Mr Cush said he hoped the letter had the effect of satisfying the court and that Hayes at all times acted with absolute professionalism and integrity. The judge thanked Mr Cush for going to that trouble to resolve his concerns. Declan McGrath SC, for Deel, said from his client's perspective an affidavit had been sworn by Jerome Soine, CEO of a Germany based security firm, ISN International Security Network, apologising for what happened. Mr Soine said on making enquiries, his company was not aware of the identities of the car owners/drivers or that anyone had been retained by Ms Woods. Therefore ISN told Deel they had not engaged the people using these particular vehicles. However, it subsequently transpired, following further information from Ms Woods that one of the vehicles – the other was completely innocent and not involved in any surveillance – was involved. Mr Soine regretted he did not tell Deel sooner and apologised on behalf of ISN. Mr Justice Cregan said he thought that now resolved the matter.
BreakingNews.ie
04-07-2025
- Business
- BreakingNews.ie
Judge wants explanation from solicitors over 'no knowledge' letter in spy case
A High Court judge has said he wants an explanation over a letter from the solicitors for HR firm Deel Inc, saying their client had "no knowledge" of the following by private investigators of a payroll manager at the centre of a rival business's "spy" affair. Mr Justice Brian Cregan said he was not going to join Deel as either a defendant or notice party in proceedings being brought by Keith O'Brien, the man who was allegedly paid €5,500 a month to pass on trade secrets of his former employer, HR software firm Rippling, to rival Deel. Rippling is now suing Deel and others, including Mr O'Brien, over the matter. Advertisement The judge said he would not join Deel in Mr O'Brien's separate case alleging harassment and surveillance because doing so, of the court's own motion, was an exceptional jurisdiction. It was also unfair to the O'Brien side, who did not want Deel added anyway, and because of the separate Rippling case against Deel. Mr O'Brien's case is against two private investigators which he claims have been involved in harassment of him and his family, including one who allegedly followed him by car to various locations and photographed his children playing in their garden. The investigators, Mark Murran, also known as Rock Investigations, and Cliona Woods of Gotham Services, strongly deny any overt surveillance or claims of harassment and intimidation. Advertisement That case was back before Mr Justice Cregan on Friday, when the judge ruled out joining Deel but said his main outstanding concern was a pre-litigation letter written by Deel's solicitors, Hayes LLP, in reply to a call from Mr O'Brien's solicitor to desist from the alleged surveillance/harassment. In that letter, Hayes stated their client had no knowledge of the cars allegedly following Mr O'Brien. On Tuesday, the judge described the Hayes letter as either a "blatant lie or a misrepresentation" because it was later admitted as being incorrect, because Deel said it had organised "discreet" but not overt surveillance on Mr O'Brien. On Friday, he said: "The question from my point of view is that this is a letter from reputable solicitors who are officers of the court and it is blatantly wrong". Advertisement He said Deel's barrister, Paul Gardiner SC, instructed by Hayes, indicated he (the judge) should not have said it was a lie or misrepresentation, but it seemed to the judge that it is still an issue for the court and should be properly addressed. He said because of that letter, earlier this week in another case in which Hayes were representatives, he had a question as to whether he could rely on it, although he did do so in that case. He believed the next step was for Hayes to swear an affidavit as to how that replying letter to the O'Brien side was written. Mr Gardiner said the letter was true at the time, and while it turned out to be incorrect because discreet surveillance was commissioned by Deel, when written, it was believed to be correct. He felt that what the court might be doing is "putting a wedge" between Deel and its representation. Mr Gardiner also believed the judge was being unfair to both Hayes and Deel in circumstances where fair procedures and due process have yet to take place and where the judge's words were being widely reported. Advertisement If the court is to have a separate inquiry into this letter, it should at least not take place until the O'Brien harassment proceedings have concluded which may well find there was no harassment, he said. Mr Justice Cregan said he would give two weeks for Mr Gardiner to take instructions and consider the matter more fully, and he said his concerns may be assuaged if it is explained in an affidavit. The judge also granted consent orders, sought by Mr Murran and Ms Woods, that Mr O'Brien preserve any information, including on CCTV, dashcam and phone, relating to the allegations against them. He also continued the injunctions restraining further surveillance.
Irish Times
04-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Judge wants explanation from solicitors over letter saying client had ‘no knowledge' of surveillance of payroll manager
A High Court judge has said he wants an explanation over a letter from the solicitors for human resources (HR) firm Deel Inc saying their client had 'no knowledge' of the following by private investigators of a payroll manager at the centre of a rival business' 'spy' affair. Mr Justice Brian Cregan said he was not going to join Deel as either a defendant or notice party in proceedings being brought by Keith O'Brien, the man who was allegedly paid €5,500 a month to pass on trade secrets of his former employer, HR software firm Rippling, to rival Deel. Rippling is now suing Deel and others, including Mr O'Brien, over the matter. The judge said he would not join Deel in Mr O'Brien's separate case alleging harassment and surveillance because doing so, of the court's own motion, was an exceptional jurisdiction. It was also unfair to the O'Brien side who did not want Deel added anyway, and because of the separate Rippling case against Deel. READ MORE Mr O'Brien's case is against two private investigators which he claims have been involved in harassment of him and his family, including one who allegedly followed him by car to various locations and photographed his children playing in their garden. The investigators, Mark Murran, also known as Rock Investigations, and Cliona Woods of Gotham Services, strongly deny any overt surveillance or claims of harassment and intimidation. That case was back before Mr Justice Cregan on Friday when the judge ruled out joining Deel but said his main outstanding concern was a pre-litigation letter written by Deel's solicitors Hayes LLP in reply to a call from Mr O'Brien's solicitor to desist from the alleged surveillance/harassment. In that letter, Hayes stated their client had no knowledge of the cars allegedly following Mr O'Brien. On Tuesday, the judge described the Hayes letter as either a 'blatant lie or a misrepresentation' because it was later admitted as being incorrect because Deel said it had organised 'discreet' but not overt surveillance on Mr O'Brien. On Friday, he said: 'The question from my point of view is that this is a letter from reputable solicitors who are officers of the court and it is blatantly wrong'. He said Deel's barrister, Paul Gardiner SC, instructed by Hayes, indicated he (judge) should not have said it was a lie or misrepresentation but it seemed to the judge that it is still an issue for the court and should be properly addressed. He said because of that letter, earlier this week in another case in which Hayes were representatives, he had a question as to whether he could rely on it although he did do so in that case. He believed the next step was for Hayes to swear an affidavit as to how that replying letter to the O'Brien side was written. Mr Gardiner said the letter was true at the time and while it turned out to be incorrect because discreet surveillance was commissioned by Deel, when written it was believed to be correct. He felt what the court might be doing is 'putting a wedge' between Deel and its representation. Mr Gardiner also believed the judge was being unfair to both Hayes and Deel in circumstances where fair procedures and due process have yet to take place and where the judge's words were being widely reported. If the court is to have a separate inquiry into this letter, it should at least not take place until the O'Brien harassment proceedings have concluded which may well find there was no harassment, he said. Mr Justice Cregan said he would give two weeks for Mr Gardiner to take instructions and consider the matter more fully and he said his concerns may be assuaged if it is explained in an affidavit. The judge also granted consent orders, sought by Mr Murran and Ms Woods, that Mr O'Brien preserve any information, including on CCTV, dashcam and phone, relating to the allegations against them. He also continued the injunctions restraining further surveillance.
BreakingNews.ie
01-07-2025
- Business
- BreakingNews.ie
Two people allegedly involved in surveillance of HR firm 'spy' are named in court
Two people who were allegedly involved in surveilling and harassing the man at the centre of the "spying" row between two rival HR giants have been added as defendants in a High Court case related to the affair. Retired private investigator Mark Murran, otherwise known as Rock Investigations, was allegedly the driver of a car involved in following and surveilling Keith O'Brien, a former Dublin-based payroll manager with Rippling, a US-headquartered multibillion-dollar HR software provider, the court heard. Advertisement Cliona Woods of Dublin-based Gotham Services was allegedly involved in organising "discreet surveillance". Both were joined as defendants in Mr O'Brien's action over the matter. Both "categorically refute" Mr O'Brien's allegations of intimidation and harassment and say the surveillance was discreet, their barrister John O'Regan told the court on Tuesday. The case was back before Mr Justice Brian Cregan to deal with a number of applications in advance of the hearing of the case, including changing the defendants from "persons unknown" to the two named defendants. It was also back in to consider whether Deel Inc, the other US based HR firm involved, should also be joined to the case. Deel allegedly paid Mr O'Brien, of Balrothery in north Dublin, to pass on Rippling's trade secrets to it, a claim it denies. Advertisement Imogen McGrath SC, for Mr O'Brien, said the defendants had consented to an order not to surveil Mr O'Brien pending determination of the proceedings. Counsel said she was not making an application to join Deel as the purpose of the case was to resolve the dispute between her client and the defendants. There may also be a third defendant but her side needed time to write to that potential defendant, she said. Counsel also said there was a significant dispute over whether the surveillance amounted to harassment, which the defendants say it did not. Mr Justice Cregan said he had been mulling over the issue and he was considering joining Deel at the motion of the court. While this was against the wishes of the O'Brien side, he did it in the context of an earlier claim that the surveillance was an interference with the administration of justice as Mr O'Brien is a defendant and witness in separate proceedings being brought over the alleged spying affair by Rippling against Deel. Advertisement It was also in circumstances where Deel's lawyers had, in a pre-litigation letter in reply to Mr O'Brien's solicitor, said it had no knowledge of the particular alleged surveillance being carried out. "Now that letter is either a blatant lie or a misrepresentation", the judge said. He said the defendants were employed by Deel, which meant it was directly implicated. Ms McGrath asked the court to first allow the parties (her client and Deel) to exchange pleadings in the normal way. Paul Gardiner SC, for Deel, said he took "grave exception to what the court said". He believed the court should not be pronouncing on a letter as misrepresentation until it had heard all the facts. His side had written that letter according to what it believed to be true at the time, he said. Advertisement If the plaintiff says it did not want Deel joined, it was not for the court to say it should, he said. His client had actually invited the O'Brien side to do so, but it chose not to. Counsel also pointed out that Mr O'Brien has entered into a cooperation agreement with Rippling, has agreed not to seek any reliefs against him in the separate Rippling/Deel case and has waived all claims against him. Ireland HR firm Deel admits it instructed 'discreet' surve... Read More The judge said he knew that joining a defendant to proceedings at the court's own motion was an exceptional jurisdiction, but that was in the circumstances of the allegations of intimidation and a letter which appeared to be manifestly misleading. He said he wanted to reflect on the matter and will decide at the end of the week whether to hear submissions from the parties on the issue. Advertisement He also said, given that Mr Gardiner accepted the letter was incorrect, he did not see why counsel took "such umbrage at my interpretation". Ms McGrath said she thought Mr Gardiner "is making a mountain out of a very small molehill". He continued the injunctions restraining surveillance of Mr O'Brien and requiring the defendants to preserve any evidence which may be used in the case. He would also hear an application on Friday by the defendants requiring Mr O'Brien to preserve evidence.
