Labour Court
Geoff Moore told a hearing of the Labour Court that the conduct of Burke and her family at various legal proceedings was “truly appalling”.
THE HEAD OF one of the country’s best-known law firms has said it is “unthinkable” that solicitor, Ammi Burke, could ever work for it again because of her “truly appalling” behaviour in various legal proceedings.
The managing partner of Arthur Cox LLP, Geoff Moore, told a hearing of the Labour Court that it would be impossible to have Burke back as an employee of the firm.
The solicitor, a member of a high-profile evangelical Christian family from Castlebar, Co Mayo, is appealing a decision of the Workplace Relations Commission in April 2022 to dismiss her claim of unfair dismissal by Arthur Cox when her contract of employment was terminated on 12 November 2019.
Burke, who began working with the firm in May 2016, is seeking to be reinstated to her former role as an associate solicitor.
The Labour Court heard earlier this week that Burke was summarily dismissed because of the breakdown of her relationship with three senior partners in the legal firm – Gráinne Hennessy, Kevin Lynch and Ultan Shannon.
Moore told the second day of the hearing today that he became aware of the issues with the solicitor in early November 2019 when Shannon was extremely upset at the situation that had been reached.
The witness said he accepted there would be personality clashes in a large organisation like Arthur Cox which had 900 employees.
However, Moore said he had never experienced any situation in a legal career of almost 30 years where three senior partners said they could not work with the same individual.
Moore said he knew it was a case that would have to be taken seriously given how “crushed” Shannon, as Burke’s effective sponsor, was by the situation.
The Labour Court heard that it was Arthur Cox’s managing partner’s decision alone to terminate the solicitor’s employment.
Moore said he took no pleasure from summarily dismissing Burke, but he knew it was a correct decision for the firm as the relationship between the parties was “utterly sundered” and any disciplinary process would have been “futile.”
He observed that Burke was incapable of seeing any other perspective, compromise or “reaching a sensible middle ground on issues.”
Moore said various court proceedings and the conduct of Burke over the subsequent seven years had proven his decision was the correct one.
‘I had never seen behaviour like it’
He recalled he had decided to make an ex-gratia payment of €70,000 – the equivalent of one year’s salary – to the solicitor in recognition that she would need “a modest period of time” to find alternative employment at the start of her legal career.
The witness noted that Arthur Cox had also offered her assistance in finding work with another legal firm.
Asked about protests that were held almost daily outside the firm’s office in Dublin by members of Burke’s family, Moore said he had received numerous communications from clients about the issue which ranged from “utter bemusement to utter astonishment and everything in between.”
Moore said he had also been prevented from giving evidence on five occasions at the WRC hearing in 2022 due to shouting by both the solicitor and her mother, Martina Burke.
“It was absolutely extraordinary. I had never seen any behaviour like it in 30 years,” he recalled.
Moore said he had received lots of sympathetic comments from clients after media reports on the case were published.
He told the Labour Court that he had also been asked repeatedly how Burke “had ever been employed by Arthur Cox in the first place.”
Commenting on various court rulings which were highly critical of the conduct of Burke and her family during legal proceedings, including where she and her mother were jailed for two weeks for contempt of court, Moore said her behaviour was “truly appalling and truly unprofessional.”
He said such conduct was “utterly extraordinary” from someone who was a solicitor and an officer of the court.
“I find it unthinkable that she would be reemployed in Arthur Cox given what I have witnessed myself,” he remarked.
Although he acknowledged that the solicitor had some really strong skills, he observed: “I would find it impossible to take Ms Burke back as an employee.”
The Labour Court also heard confirmation by Moore that Burke had not made any payments to date to legal costs incurred by Arthur Cox that she had been ordered to pay by various courts.
‘Best course of action followed’
Under cross-examination by Burke, who legally represented herself, Moore accepted that he had never spoken directly to her about the issues of concern.
When pointed out by Burke that he had made a decision about her job without ever talking to her, he replied that he had based it on what he was told by someone “of enormous integrity.”
Asked if it was important that someone should be made aware of allegations against them, Moore said it depended on the circumstances.
“I believe the course of action followed was the best for all concerned,” he added.
The witness accepted that he had not used Arthur Cox’s formal disciplinary procedures in the case.
Moore told the appellant that he had decided on what he believed was “the least-worst outcome for the firm, and actually you.”
He rejected Burke’s suggestion that he had essentially decided to break the law.
Moore said he believed the manner in which the solicitor’s employment was terminated was permissible and it was for the Labour Court to decide if the dismissal was fair.
When Burke suggested that his actions had been grossly disruptive to her career prospects, he replied that her difficulties in securing alternative employment were all due to her subsequent conduct.
Moore said he firmly believed that her dismissal had not impacted on her ability to find other work and any difficulties she encountered were “entirely of your own making.”
‘Frantic rant’
In other evidence, former senior partner at Arthur Cox, Gráinne Hennessy described how Burke went on a “frantic rant” after receiving an email inviting her to lunch in January 2019.
Hennessy said she was having a lunch for two other new associates to celebrate their new positions with the firm and realised she had inadvertently not invited Burke as she had not worked with her before.
She told the Labour Court that Burke stood over her in a physically intimidating manner within five minutes of receiving the email.
“She was offended, disgusted and felt that her work was valued less than the two guys who were included in the invitation,” said Hennessy.
The witness said she repeatedly apologised to Burke but “nothing was landing.”
Asked about her reactions by counsel for Arthur Cox, Peter Ward SC, Hennessy replied: “This was the worst case of victim mentality I have worked with in my career. Nothing was going to undo the offence. I have never witnessed anything more shocking in a work context.”
Hennessy said she believed Burke behaved herself as a trainee with the firm, but “the shackles came off” once she was made an associate solicitor with Arthur Cox.
Under cross-examination, Hennessy said she did not question the solicitor’s abilities as a lawyer.
She added: “You had huge potential, but you are so lacking in every other respect.”
The hearing was adjourned and is expected to resume on a date in January 2027.