Micheal Ian Larkin (by Order) v Wealth Options Ltd and Brian O'Neill

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Humphreys J.
• Judgment Date: 02 December 2021
• Neutral Citation: [2021] IEHC 744
• Docket Number: [Bankruptcy No. 2505]
• Court: High Court

Between

Micheal Ian Larkin (By Order)

Applicant

and

Wealth Options Limited and Brian O'Neill

Respondents

and

The Revenue Commissioners

Notice Party

[2021] IEHC 744

[Bankruptcy No. 2505]

THE HIGH COURT

BANKRUPTCY

JUDGMENT of Humphreys J. delivered on Thursday the 2nd day of December, 2021

1 The debtor here was adjudicated bankrupt on 22nd January, 2014. He was discharged from bankruptcy on 29th July, 2016.

2 The petitioning creditor, Marketspreads Ltd. (later renamed as Shelbourne Markets Ltd.) was dissolved on 28th December, 2017.

3 A notice of motion seeking directions in the bankruptcy was brought by Christopher Lehane, the former Official Assignee, on foot of an affidavit sworn on 16th January, 2019.

4 Section 169 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 regarding costs came into operation on 7th October, 2019, and because that development post-dated the application here, the section does not apply to the costs of the present matter: see M.S. (Afghanistan) v. Minister for Justice and Equality [2021] IEHC 164, ( [2021] 3 JIC 1608 Unreported, High Court, 16th March, 2021).

5 On 24th July, 2020, Mr. Lehane retired as Official Assignee. Mr. Michael Ian Larkin, the current incumbent, was appointed on 16th November, 2020.

6 On 29th January, 2021, Pilkington J. gave judgment on the motion ( Lehane v. Wealth Options Ltd. (Uncirculated, High Court, 29th January, 2021)), answering a number of questions arising from the request for directions. She left over the question of costs for further submissions, but unfortunately subsequently became indisposed. As a result, the matter of costs and of the form of the order came before me on 15th November, 2021 for hearing. At the risk of stating the obvious, in such circumstances I have to take the judgment of Pilkington J. as a given, and seek to give effect to it as best I can in the context of dealing with the outstanding matters.

Substitution of the Official Assignee

7 The discharged bankrupt consented to the substitution of the current Official Assignee as applicant, so I am making that order without the necessity for the formality of a notice of motion. Obviously I can take judicial notice of the fact that Mr. Larkin is the current incumbent and I don't need an affidavit saying that, which would be pointless formalism.

Applicant's application for costs

8 The general principle is that costs follow the event, and the event was predominantly in favour of the Official Assignee's proposed answers to the questions that arose on the application for directions. There can be special circumstances to depart from that, an example of which is Corcoran v. Commissioner of An Garda Siochána [2021] IEHC 11, [2020] 1 JIC 0401 (Unreported, High Court, Simons J., 4th January, 2021). One matter of relevance is that the subject-matter of the application was not entirely terra incognita, because Pilkington J. did derive some assistance from an earlier judgment in Lehane v. Cody and Aviva...