The Supreme Court has awarded unsuccessful appellants ZG and a minor identified as EW 50% of their appeal costs after their constitutional challenge to rules governing succession to statutory tenancies.
In a ruling delivered on 2 April 2026, the court said the case raised issues of general public importance and significant questions about Articles 40.1 and 40.5 of the Constitution.
ZG and EW, who sued through his aunt and next friend ZG, had challenged section 39(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004. They argued that although the provision allows succession to a statutory tenancy, it does not extend that entitlement to children under 18, allegedly breaching constitutional equality and the protection afforded to the dwelling home.
The High Court dismissed the claim without making a costs order. The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed the appeal by a majority, with Chief Justice O'Donnell, Mr Justice Charleton and Mr Justice Woulfe concurring, while Mr Justice Hogan and Ms Justice Donnelly dissented.
The remaining issue was who should bear the Supreme Court appeal costs. Clúid Housing Association and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission sought no costs, while the State respondents, despite succeeding, also asked that there be no order for costs against the applicants.
ZG and EW argued instead that they should recover two-thirds of their appeal costs.
The Supreme Court declined to go that far. It said this was not one of the rare cases where an unsuccessful appellant should recover all costs from the successful party. However, the constitutional issues were important, the proceedings arose from tragic circumstances, and it was understandable that the applicants would seek to test the law.
The court therefore awarded them 50% of their appeal costs calculated on the basis of one day's hearing, excluding the costs of case-management hearings.