H v DPP, The Minister for Justice, and Equality, Ireland and The Attorney General

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr Justice Barr
• Judgment Date: 21 April 2021
• Neutral Citation: [2021] IEHC 308
• Docket Number: [Record No. 2020/569 JR]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 21 April 2021

Between

H

Applicant

and

The Director of Public Prosecutions, The Minister for Justice, and Equality, Ireland and The Attorney General

Respondents

and

Dáil Eireann

Notice Party

[2021] IEHC 308

[Record No. 2020/569 JR]

THE HIGH COURT

Costs – Judicial review – Legal Aid - Custody Issues Scheme – Respondents and notice party each seeking an order that their costs should be paid by the applicant– Whether costs should follow the event

Facts: The High Court, in the course of the principal judgment delivered on 24th March, 2021 (2021 IEHC 215), ruled that the applicant’s application in the judicial review proceedings was out of time. The Court refused to make an order extending the time for the bringing of the application. Accordingly, the applicant’s application for relief was refused. The respondents, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General, and the notice party, Dáil Eireann, each sought an order that their costs should be paid by the applicant. Those submissions were based on the argument that as the applicant was unsuccessful in the judicial review proceedings, costs should follow the event; meaning that the respondents and the notice party should be entitled to an order that they recover their costs from the applicant. The applicant was a prisoner in Castlerea prison, awaiting trial on a number of serious assault charges. It was submitted on his behalf that a recommendation should be made by the Court that his costs should be paid under the Legal Aid – Custody Issues Scheme.

Held by the Court that, having had regard to the fundamental protection that the scheme provides for the rights of people who are in prison, and to the fact that the applicant was successful in obtaining leave at the ex parte stage, it was appropriate in the circumstances of this case to make a recommendation that the fees incurred by the applicant be discharged under the scheme. Accordingly, the Court recommended that the fees incurred by the applicant in respect of retaining a solicitor, senior counsel and junior counsel, being: John M. Quinn & Company Solicitors, Mr O’Higgins SC and Mr Hourigan BL, be paid under the scheme.

The Court held that were it to accede to the request of the respondent and the notice party, that the applicant be made personally liable for their costs, that would have a chilling effect on prisoners seeking to challenge aspects of their detention. The Court held that this would not be in the interests of justice. Having had regard to the totality of the circumstances involved in the case, the Court held that it was reasonable that the respondents and the notice party each bear their own costs, and the Court so ordered.

Ruling on costs.

RULING ON COSTS of Mr Justice Barr delivered electronically on the 21st day of April, 2021

1 The principal judgment in this matter was delivered on 24th March, 2021 ( 2021 IEHC 215). In the course of that judgment, the court ruled that the applicant's...