Why Presbyterian Church defendants wanted to keep details of Employment Tribunal Case secret

EXCLUSIVE ANGELA DAVISON, Sunday Life, December 28th, 2025

LANDMARK LEGAL VICTORY FOR SUNDAY LIFE

The primary concern of defendants from the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) in an employment tribunal case was that making information public could have an adverse effect on them personally.

In a precedent-setting case, PCI argued that publication of details should not be permitted as previous hearings to a judicial mediation were held in private.

But in a landmark case taken by Mediahuis UK Limited, owners of Sunday Life and the Belfast Telegraph, against the PCI and other named church respondents, a judge last Monday ruled that this newspaper had the right to publish information concerning the discrimination claim.

The mediation through the earlier employment tribunal resulted in a confidential settlement and an effective non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with Renuga (Renee) Finnegan, who had alleged unfair dismissal due to race and sex discrimination.

The case was brought in February 2023. Mrs Finnegan withdrew her allegations in February this year, all of which were denied by the church and named respondents.

Mrs Finnegan's husband Tom, a former trainee Presbyterian minister, settled a separate case against PCI around the same time, which has previously been reported by this newspaper.

On December 9, four named figures from PCI attended a hearing to try to prevent the reporting of their names and details of the claims in the case.

Some of PCI's top brass took the witness stand including former moderator, Rev Dr Trevor Gribben — who stood down last month amid a safeguarding crisis within the church — and Acting Clerk for the General Assembly, Rev David Allen.

Head of Human Resources, Sarah Leung, was also a named respondent while Ken Swarbrick, PCI's financial secretary, represented the church itself.

A fifth respondent attended, also an employee of PCI, but the judge ruled that he should not be named as he admitted he had not been made aware of the mediation at the time and was only notified of the settlement later.

All swore on the Bible to adopt their written statements, which had been submitted to the tribunal in advance. Objections were made to information being made public including evidence from all of the respondents, highlighting the potential adverse effect on them personally.

Stigma

Mr Swarbrick's evidence, on behalf of PCI, centred on the confidential nature of the settlement agreement and the potential reputational damage to PCI, while Dr Gribben emphasised the particular importance of confidentiality to him because, at the time of the judicial mediation, he had been nominated for the moderator role and felt he had a greater expectation of privacy.

Dr Allen stated that his medical issues could be exaggerated on disclosure of information while Mrs Leung argued that she may suffer distress and stigma if the nature of the claims were disclosed as her husband is of a different race to her and she has a racially diverse family.

However, Judge Orla Murray rejected many of their arguments, including that there was no medical evidence provided to support Rev Allen's claims.

This newspaper's owners, Mediahuis, pointed out that, as one of Ireland's leading charities, PCI should be answerable to the public and its members for its governance. In her ruling, the judge decided the newspaper had the right to publish information including most of the respondents' names in the case, and the basis of the claims made.

The central argument by Mediahuis and its legal team centred around the right to information via the Dring principle (which allows for access to documents in the interest of open justice) and whether the principles of open justice were engaged, allowing public scrutiny of the courts as well as enabling the public to understand how the justice system works.

Judge Murray ruled that the fact of Mrs Finnegan's seven case management pre hearings not being held in open court was not a necessary point which would prevent the public from having knowledge of the case.

Speaking after the judgment, Carson McDowell lawyer Fergal McGoldrick commented on the importance of the case, saying: “Judge Murray's detailed ruling is the first judgment in Northern Ireland focusing on the Dring jurisdiction, enabling media and public access to court documents so the work of the courts can be better scrutinised and understood.

“The church argued what Mediahuis sought did not concern open justice, and was unprecedented in the UK given the previous private hearings and the absence of a public record to date. The Tribunal's decision to release the information is welcome recognition of the open justice principle, and another example of Mediahuis's commitment to journalism in the public interest.”

Unlike practice in the high court, where anyone can receive a copy of the writ, showing names of parties and heads of claim even after settlement, rules in the employment tribunal court differ.

The case, which was “withdrawn”, wasn't entered into the publicly accessible register due to new rules regarding the registration of tribunal claims, which came into effect last December, meaning basic details were not openly accessible.

Review

On Tuesday a PCI spokesperson said: “While we acknowledge and accept the tribunal judgment ordering the release of some of the information requested, we considered it was important to seek a tribunal determination on the application, given the confidential nature of the resolution of the case and our responsibility to protect the confidentiality of individual members of staff.”

The use of NDAs, especially in the charity sector, was brought earlier this month to the Assembly floor by Doug Beattie MLA, who says he will continue to pursue the matter in the new year.

Last month, following the admission of the church's safeguarding failings, Rev David Allen said in a statement read out to all congregations regarding the issues: “We will not sweep this under the carpet, we will open ourselves to external review, and will cooperate fully.”

In an apparent contradiction to this public statement, some have argued that the church's use of NDAs is an attempt to silence people.

Last week, a debate on their use was prompted by Rev Susan Moore in the Special General Assembly, but unknown to the audience was that the church's acting clerk was part of an attempt to stop information coming out about the latest church NDA to be revealed this year.

General Assembly solicitor Stephen Gowdy defended the use of NDAs, saying they are not imposed, but are agreements between parties.

Previous requests to release three from NDAs denied by Presbyterian Church

ANGELA DAVISON, Sunday Life, December 28th, 2025

Three people subject to non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as part of their settlements this year with the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) have had their requests to be released from them rejected by the church.

Professor Laurence Kirkpatrick, Tom Finnegan and his wife Renuga (Renée) Finnegan each wrote separately to PCI convenor, Rev David Bruce, to ask if their cases could be brought before the church's General Council, claiming that they felt under significant pressure by the church to sign NDAs.

In correspondence seen by this newspaper, the three individuals stated that they were not made fully aware of the consequences any NDA and non-disparagement clauses would cause, adding that they felt they did not truly offer their informed consent to them.

The letters also challenged PCI's statement to the media that NDAs are made by “mutual agreement” which they say is “misleading”.

Reported

The issue was brought before PCI's General Council on November 19 but requests for release from the NDAs were rejected by the church.

Minutes from the meeting state that: “The Financial Secretary (Ken Swarbrick) reported on requests that had been made in the names of Mr T Finnegan, Mrs R Finnegan and Dr L Kirkpatrick, to be released from the terms of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) made with them at the time of the conclusion of their employment with PCI.

“All respondents had agreed to defend the case. PCI's insurers have declined to provide cover for this case. This decision may be appealed to the Financial Ombudsman. The Financial Secretary moved, Mr Trevor Long seconded, that PCI continues to defend the case. Discussion followed. This was agreed.”

Prof Kirkpatrick explained: “The statement I received from PCI says that 'PCI continues to defend the case', but the case is dead, there is no case to defend.

“I think the important question is why is PCI so determined to hide how they dealt with me and other individuals placed under an NDA? This is the question I would like a PCI leader to explain.”

He also said that comments made during the General Assembly meeting asking if recipients of settlements “would pay the money back” were “offensive” to him.

He has asked that the matter be considered again before the General Council.

On Tuesday, the Belfast Telegraph revealed that Mrs Renée Finnegan had reached a settlement with a confidential agreement in a tribunal case against the Presbyterian Church alleging unfair dismissal due to race and sex discrimination.

Mrs Finnegan said: “Contrary to what was said at the Special Assembly by PCI's solicitor, Stephen Gowdy, I did not have legal representation to advise me in settling my tribunal case. I represented myself against the institution and individual respondents, which was overwhelming in itself.

“In refusing to release me from the NDA, PCI did not engage with or respond to my primary reason for my request being that trauma thrives in silence.”

The Presbyterian Church in Ireland was approached for comment but no response was received at the time of going to print.

From Irish State Archives

US may be 'hostile' to republicans after 9/11

RALPH REIGEL, Sunday Life, December 28th, 2025

STATE PAPERS REVEAL FEARS THE 'WAR ON TERROR' WOULD RELEGATE IRISH RELATIONS

Secret files show Irish government officials were worried that the 9/11 terror attacks in the United States would reduce the amount of time Washington would devote to the Northern Ireland peace process.

Confidential files released as part of the State Papers in Dublin also show they believed the September 11, 2001, attacks would impact how US politicians viewed the 'new dispensation'.

Just 24 hours after the attacks, a government official put together a briefing document on its potential impacts on the peace process.

While noting it was “very early days” to assess the consequences on the foreign policy of US president George W Bush's administration, the official predicted that the US could not enter a prolonged period of introspection when matters of internal security and dealing with terrorism would “dominate the agenda for a long time to come”.

Cordite

The official said that the peace process would have to compete for space on the US foreign policy agenda, while noting that the war on terrorism could cause US lawmakers to take a more “exacting approach” with republicans in Northern Ireland due to the “whiff of cordite”.

The government official advised that this be considered in any plans to engage in a review of the Good Friday Agreement, as well as the timing for any planned visits to Washington DC.

The briefing document, published as part of the annual release of Government documents from the National Archives, notes Mr Bush's comments that his government would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbour them” as a potential “precursor of this zero-tolerance approach to terrorism which may now drive US foreign and defence policy”.

One official said it was likely that US foreign policy would now be “largely driven by the imperative of the war against international terrorism” and would see an environment where security-focused policy advice coming from the FBI, the US Department of Justice and the intelligence agencies would “completely out-trump any more sophisticated or nuanced analysis of conflict resolution situations” from the State Department or National Security Council.

“It is likely, therefore, that defeating terrorism will become a central organising principle for US policy for some time to come.

“In this regard, US policymakers may not be inclined to make fine distinctions between different varieties of 'terrorist' organisation; between their various stages of transition from paramilitaries to politicians; or between the political and military wings of insurrectionary movements.”

Enemy

The document states that while the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks were associated with “Middle East/Islamic elements”, this will “not insulate the republican movement from much more rigorous and critical scrutiny in an environment which increasingly lumps together, as the enemy, all shades of 'terrorism'”.

​The document predicted the republican movement may experience a “very chilly” and “more hostile environment” in the US if it did not take quicker action on disarmament — which began shortly thereafter — and clarify its position on the Colombian guerilla group Farc.

“With both sides of congress now apparently sharing the administration's view that the US is at war with terrorism, Irish-American congressmen may now feel the need to adopt a more exacting approach in their dealings with the republican movement,” reads the document.

“The 'whiff of cordite' dimension (albeit at a respectable distance from its militant past) has contributed to the celebrity status of the Sinn Féin leadership in the US and to their appeal among Irish-America.

“In the very different 'attack on America' environment which now pertains in the US, that same dimension may now become a drag on Sinn Féin's respectability and access.”

All-Ireland Court doubtful

Grainne Ni Eocha, Sunday Life, December 28th, 2025

It was “rather dubious” whether an all-island British-Irish court would lead to the conviction of more fugitives, according to Ireland's attorney general in 1982.

Patrick Connolly SC, who would resign later that year after prolific murderer Malcolm McArthur was arrested in his apartment, made his assessment shortly after the new Irish government was formed.

A meeting was held in April 1982, a month after Charles Haughey came to power for a second time and before his government collapsed in December of that year.

In a document labelled released this year as part of the National Archives in Dublin, Mr Connolly told the new Irish government that he was against the suggestion of an all-island court: “The attorney general was of the opinion that the proposal considered in this regard was a cumbersome arrangement, the merits of which, in terms of securing more convictions of fugitive offenders, were, in his view, rather dubious. There were particular difficulties as regards the question of whether a right of appeal would lie.”

In relation to joint interrogation, he said that gardai feared attacks would be mounted at Garda stations if RUC officers could be present.

In January of that year, before the general election was called, a meeting was held at Iveagh House attended by taoiseach Garret FitzGerald, the ministers for justice and foreign affairs, and then attorney general Peter Sutherland SC.

The note from that meeting stated that talks had begun between the British and Irish attorneys general and, since then, “there was pressure from the British side for us to advance our position on extradition and joint questioning”. It also noted that there was “no prospect” of the British agreeing to a joint court without movement on joint questioning or extradition.