CURTIN v CLERK of Dáil Éireann and Others

JurisdictionIreland
CourtSupreme Court
JudgeMurray C.J.
Judgment Date06 April 2006
Neutral Citation[2006] IESC 27
Date06 April 2006

[2006] IESC 27

SUPREME COURT

Murray C.J.

Denham J.

McGuinness J.

Hardiman J.

Geoghegan J.

Fennelly J.

McCracken J.

198/05
203/05
CURTIN v CLERK OF DAIL EIREANN & ORS

BETWEEN

BRIAN CURTIN
APPLICANT / APPELLANT
-v-
CLERK OF DÁIL ÉIREANN, CLERK OF SEANAD ÉIREANN, DEPUTY DENIS O'DONOVAN, DEPUTY JERRY CROWLEY, DEPUTY JAMES O'KEEFE, DEPUTY JAN O'SULLIVAN, SENATOR JOHN DARDIS, SENATOR GERALDINE FEENEY, SENATOR MICHAEL FINUCANE, IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
RESPONDENTS

CONSTITUTION ART 6

CONSTITUTION ART 35.4

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE:

Costs

Discretion - Costs follow event - Unusual facts - Novel issue - Public interest -Plaintiff awarded half costs (198 & 203/2005 - SC - 6/4/2006) Curtin v Clerk of Dáil Éireann

1

RULING of the Court on the question of costs delivered on the 6th day of April, 2006 by Murray C.J.

2

Following upon the judgment delivered in this case on the 9th March, 2006 the Appellant has applied for an Order for his costs. The Attorney General and other parties have applied for the costs of the appeal against the Appellant. Each of the parties have made a similar application for costs of the proceedings in High Court as they have for the costs of this appeal. The costs awarded in the High Court concerning other matters are not in issue.

3

The Appellant was refused any of the reliefs which he sought in the High Court and on appeal in this Court. This Court ruled against him on a number of discrete issues which had been argued on his behalf in the appeal.

4

The general rule is that costs follow the event subject to the Court having a discretion, for special reason, to make a different Order. It is a discretion to be exercised in the circumstances and context of each case and is one which is so exercised from time to time.

5

Counsel for all parties referred to previous decisions of this Court, and the High Court, in which a discretion was exercised to make an order concerning costs which did not follow the general rule. It would neither be possible nor desirable to lay down one definitive rule according to which exceptions are made to the general rule. The discretionary function of the Court to be exercised in the context of each case militates against such a definitive rule of exception and it is also the reason why previous decisions on such a question are always of limited value.

6

One of the arguments advanced on behalf of the Appellant for an Order of costs in his favour was that he had succeeded in a core issue in his case, namely, that fair procedures required that there should be a dual adjudication on the proposal for his removal, that first there must be an adjudication as to whether he was guilty of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 cases
  • McAleenan v AIG (Europe) Ltd
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 16 July 2010
    ...any departure from the general rule is one which must be decided by a court in the circumstances of each case. In Curtin v. Dáil Éireann [2006] IESC 27, (Unreported, Supreme Court, 6th April, 2006) this court stated:- 16 'The general rule is that costs follow the event subject to the court ......
  • F(S) v Her Honour Judge Yvonne Murphy, DPP, Ireland and Attorney General
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 18 November 2009
    ...IEHC 346 DPP v KELLY 2008 3 IR 202 2007/19/3829 2007 IEHC 450 CURTIN v CLERK OF DAIL EIREANN & ORS UNREP SUPREME 6.4.2006 2006/13/2688 2006 IESC 27 DUNNE v MIN FOR ENVIRONMENT & ORS 2008 2 IR 775 2007/16/3368 2007 IESC 60 SEKANINA v AUSTRIA 1994 17 EHRR 221 RUSHITI v AUSTRIA 2001 33......
  • Godsil v Ireland
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 24 February 2015
    ...1 I.R. 443. Cunningham v. President of the Circuit Court [2012] IESC 39, [2012] 3 I.R. 222; [2012] 2 I.L.R.M. 449. Curtin v. Dáil Éireann [2006] IESC 27, (Unreported, Supreme Court, 6th April, 2006). Desmond v. M.G.N. Ltd. [2008] IESC 56, [2009] 1 I.R. 737. Dunne v. Minister for the Environ......
  • Dunne v Min for the Environment and Others
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 6 December 2007
    ...UNITED TRAMWAYS CO (1896) LTD & O'BRIEN 1929 IR 642 CURTIN v CLERK OF DAIL EIREANN & ORS UNREP SUPREME 6.4.2006 2006/13/2688 2006 IESC 27 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Costs Normal rule that costs follow event - Exception to normal rule in relation to costs of proceedings - Discretion of ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT