High Court Issues Injunctions Against Dublin Councillor for Intimidation

The High Court in Ireland has granted interim injunctions against Gavin Pepper, an independent city councillor from Dublin, prohibiting him from harassing the managing director of Pepper Finance Corporation (Ireland) Ltd DAC, Ian Wigglesworth. The injunctions aim to protect Mr. Wigglesworth and his family following a series of alarming incidents involving Mr. Pepper.

Details of the Injunctions

The court’s decision was prompted by Mr. Pepper’s actions, which included filming Mr. Wigglesworth’s family at their home in a housing estate in west Dublin. This filming reportedly upset Mr. Wigglesworth’s son, who has Down Syndrome and was playing outside when the incident occurred.

Under the terms of the injunction, Mr. Pepper is restrained from obstructing, threatening, or intimidating Mr. Wigglesworth and his family. He is also required to remove social media posts that contain footage of the incidents outside the Wigglesworth residence. Mr. Pepper’s social media activity has drawn scrutiny, as he has been associated with far-right ideologies and has made numerous posts that have been characterized as offensive and defamatory.

Legal Context and Allegations

During the court proceedings, Brian Conroy SC, representing Mr. Wigglesworth and Pepper Finance, highlighted Mr. Pepper’s established connection with far-right movements and his role in inciting agitation that has led to serious criminal activity. Mr. Conroy noted that while there is no evidence directly linking Mr. Pepper to violent acts, he has contributed to an atmosphere of intimidation, particularly through his social media presence.

In an affidavit, Mr. Wigglesworth detailed incidents where Mr. Pepper filmed his family, including his son, and threatened to camp outside their home unless he engaged with Mr. Pepper regarding interest rates charged by Pepper Finance. Mr. Wigglesworth expressed distress over a social media post where Mr. Pepper allegedly disparaged his son, amplifying the emotional toll on the family.

A second defendant in the case, David Rafferty, who resides in the same area as Mr. Pepper, is also implicated for disseminating personal information about Mr. Wigglesworth. Although he is named in the case, no injunction has been sought against him at this time.

Mr. Wigglesworth’s concerns extend to the safety of his family, particularly given the nature of the threatening comments that have emerged in response to Mr. Pepper’s posts. He described one remark from a social media user indicating a willingness to engage in violence, stating, “I would have been there in a couple of minutes to play baseball with them if you know what I mean.” Another comment suggested that Mr. Wigglesworth’s house should be “melted.”

The High Court, presided over by Mr. Justice Brian Cregan, has ordered that Mr. Pepper also refrain from publishing addresses of other employees at Pepper Finance, aiming to curb further harassment. The court will reconvene on Thursday to discuss the possibility of extending the injunctions to include Pepper Finance as an entity.

These developments reflect ongoing tensions surrounding Mr. Pepper’s activities, which have previously included controversial public demonstrations. Reports indicate that he has been involved in filming vandalism at a makeshift asylum seeker encampment in Dublin and has faced public criticism for his actions.

As Mr. Wigglesworth attempts to navigate this distressing situation, he has reached out to social media platforms in an effort to have the threatening posts removed, although his efforts have yet to yield results.

The implications of this case extend beyond personal grievances, raising broader questions about the influence of social media on public discourse and the responsibilities of individuals in positions of authority.