Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
IESC 56 ECLI:IE:SC:2021:56 KI-generiert

Supreme Court dismisses appeal on costs, ruling no order made due to fairness in circumstances.

Geschäftsnummer IESC 56
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Irland (IE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Supreme Court ruled on costs following the appellant's unsuccessful appeal against a refusal of judicial review. The appellant had previously lost in the High Court and the Supreme Court regarding the review of district judges and the Director of Public Prosecutions. Although the general rule is that costs follow the event, the court decided to make no order for costs as a fair resolution given the specific circumstances.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986; s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015: The court may depart from the general rule that costs follow the event to make no order for costs where it is fair and just in the circumstances.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
costs follow the event judicial review refusal no order for costs fair resolution Superior Courts Rules

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986
Costs follow the event (Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986; s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015).
s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015
Costs follow the event (Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986; s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015).
Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015
Costs follow the event (Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986; s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015).

Zitierte Rechtsprechung

KI-generiert
Kevin Tracey v. District Judge Tom O'Donnell and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Record No. 173/2008
Kevin Tracey v. District Judge Hugh O'Donnell and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Record No. 355/2006
[2020] IESC 21
Supreme Court dismisses appeal on judicial review of District Court conduct in traffic summons proceedings.
[2009] IEHC 14
High Court dismisses certiorari and mandamus claims against District Judges for road traffic offence hearing conduct.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

THE SUPREME COURT

[RECORD NO.: 262/2009]

MacMenamin J. Dunne J. Charleton J.

BETWEEN:

KEVIN TRACEY

APPELLANT

AND

DISTRICT JUDGE MIRIAM MALONE AND DISTRICT JUDGE

BRIDGET REILLY, KEVIN GROGAN, RONAN COFFEY, AND THE

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

RESPONDENTS

Ruling on Costs by Mr. Justice John MacMenamin dated the 23rd day of August, 2021

1. This is a ruling on costs. The judgment in this appeal was delivered on the 30th April, 2020 by MacMenamin J ([2020] IESC 21). The appeal was against a judgment and order of Cooke J., delivered as long ago as the 20 th January, 2009, where that judge refused to grant judicial review against the respondents ([2009] IEHC 14). The circumstances were fully set out in detail by the High Court judgment and this Court’s judgment. The appellant’s application for judicial review was refused. His appeal failed in this Court, in a judgment which addressed all the issues raised.

2. Costs follow the event (Order 99, Rules of the Superior Courts 1986; s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015). Prima facie, the respondents would be entitled to their costs. However, in the circumstances, counsel for the respondents submit that the appropriate and just order is that no order for costs should be made. In my view, this is a fair resolution of the matter. I would, therefore, make no order for the costs of this appeal, or in the High Court. (See also observations made in Kevin Tracey v. District Judge Tom O’Donnell and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Record No. 173/2008, and Kevin Tracey v. District Judge Hugh O’Donnell and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Record No. 355/2006, rulings on costs also delivered today.)