The Court of Appeal has ruled that a self-represented couple can recover costs beyond basic out-of-pocket expenses after an appeal against a discovery order was withdrawn before hearing.
Ms Justice Butler delivered the court's judgment on June 26, 2026, in ongoing litigation brought by Joseph and Katherine Corcoran against Permanent TSB, Start Mortgages, two receivers and Mars Capital Finance Ireland.
The dispute arose after the second to fifth defendants appealed a High Court order requiring discovery of documents relating to the transfer of the Corcorans' mortgages from Permanent TSB to Start. The appellants later withdrew that appeal unconditionally in November 2025, just over a month before its scheduled hearing. The Corcorans, who had represented themselves, then sought their costs.
The appellants argued that any award should be confined to the couple's outlays and expenses, reflecting the traditional position that litigants-in-person cannot charge for their own legal work. They also relied on an earlier conditional offer to pay reasonable costs.
The Court of Appeal rejected the argument based on that offer. Butler J said it had been made on a without-prejudice basis and was conditional on an undertaking concerning confidentiality of discovered documents. The subsequent withdrawal of the appeal was unconditional.
The court found the Corcorans had been entirely successful on the appeal and were entitled to a costs order under the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. Importantly, the order would not be expressly limited to expenses and outlay.
Butler J drew a distinction between legal work and administrative work. A self-represented litigant cannot recover costs for personally drafting pleadings, preparing legal submissions or making legal argument. However, the court said there was no equivalent principled reason automatically to exclude administrative work of a type that would ordinarily be recoverable when performed by non-professional staff in a solicitor's office.
The ruling does not decide which individual items the Corcorans can recover. Unless the parties agree the amount, that question will go first to the Legal Costs Adjudicator, with any review proceeding to the High Court under the 2015 Act.