The Court of Appeal has upheld a decision that Martin Parker should not receive his High Court costs after two legal arguments arising from a Castlebar drink-driving prosecution were rejected.
The underlying prosecution took place in Castlebar District Court in April 2012. Parker was charged over an allegation of drink driving after a certificate of analysis recorded 252 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood.
His solicitor raised two legal questions during the District Court proceedings. The District Court judge decided to state what is known as a consultative case for the opinion of the High Court. That procedure allows a lower court to obtain a superior court’s ruling on a legal question arising in proceedings before it.
Ms Justice Donnelly subsequently answered both questions against Parker. She made no order as to costs, meaning neither side was ordered to pay the other’s legal costs arising from that High Court hearing.
Parker appealed the costs decision. The Director of Public Prosecutions brought a cross-appeal.
Mr Justice Kelly, delivering the Court of Appeal judgment, stressed that Parker had not formally requested the case stated, although his solicitor had raised the legal issues which prompted it. An earlier version of the High Court order incorrectly recorded that the case had been stated at Parker’s request and had to be amended.
The Court of Appeal rejected the argument that someone in Parker’s position should receive costs from the DPP regardless of whether the legal issues were decided in their favour.
The court said there was no such rule or established practice. Costs in a consultative case stated remain a matter for judicial discretion.
Finding no flaw in Ms Justice Donnelly’s exercise of that discretion, all three appeal judges agreed that the costs order should stand. Both Parker’s appeal and the DPP’s cross-appeal were dismissed.