Meehan v Shawcove Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Noonan
• Judgment Date: 03 November 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] IECA 247
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Docket Number: Record Number: 2021/185

Between/

Kevin Meehan

Plaintiff/Respondent

and

Shawcove Limited, Ellickson Engineering Limited, Kilell Limited, Otis Limited, Otis Elevator Ireland Limited, and Daldoss Elevetronic SPA

Defendants/Appellants

[2022] IECA 247

Noonan J.

Faherty J.

Binchy J.

Record Number: 2021/185

High Court Record Number: 2013/12442P

THE COURT OF APPEAL

COSTS RULING of Mr. Justice Noonan delivered on the 3rd day of November, 2022

1 The principal judgment herein was delivered on the 8th September, 2022 ( [2022] IECA 208). The defendants' appeal was confined to the quantum of the award of general damages obtained by the plaintiff in the High Court. That court gave judgment on the 23rd June, 2021 in the amount of €508,649, inclusive of general and special damages. The general damages component amounted to €375,000 which this court reduced to €250,000, resulting in a net award to the plaintiff in the sum of €383,649.

2 There is no issue arising in relation to the costs in the High Court, the plaintiff's award both in that court and this court on appeal having far exceeded any offers made prior to the trial.

3 The appeal first came on for hearing before this court on the 24th March, 2022 when the matter was adjourned with an order for the costs thrown away in favour of the plaintiff. The appeal again came on for hearing on the adjourned date of the 15th July, 2022. On the previous day, the 14th July, 2022, the defendants made an offer of €351,501 which was rejected by the plaintiff. No counter offer was made by the plaintiff from the date of filing of the Notice of Appeal. In accordance with para. 88 of the principal judgment, both parties have now delivered written submissions in which each claims the costs of the appeal.

4 The defendants claim to have “won” the appeal in that they claim to have succeeded in the only issue arising, namely that the damages awarded by the High Court were excessive. They therefore claim to have prevailed on the “event” and to have been “entirely successful” as that expression is used in s. 169 of the Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015. The plaintiff on the other hand says that he has been entirely successful in that by proceeding with the appeal, he has obtained an award in excess of any prior offer made by the defendants. He too claims therefore to have prevailed on the “event” and been “entirely successful”.

5 A not dissimilar, albeit more complex, situation arose in Higgins v The Irish Aviation Authority [2020] IECA 277, a costs judgment of Murray J. following the principal judgment delivered by Binchy J. ( [2020] IECA 157). In that case, a jury had awarded damages in the amount of €387,000 which were reduced on appeal to this court to €76,500. Shortly prior to the hearing of the appeal, the defendant made an offer which, when the costs of the appeal were factored in, was less...