Judgment: 2026-10-06 · Court archive

Supreme Court awards taxpayers half their costs after appeal clarified fee law

The court made no costs order for the High Court or Court of Appeal proceedings, but awarded the two defendants 50% of their Supreme Court costs.

The Supreme Court · [2026] IESC 41

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Joseph Howley (Plaintiff)
  • Paul Howard (Defendant)
  • Una McClean (Defendant)
  • Attorney General
  • Law Society of Ireland
  • Gerard Hogan (Judge)
What

The court made no costs order for the High Court or Court of Appeal proceedings, but awarded the two defendants 50% of their Supreme Court costs.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Ireland
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The court had previously found the fee arrangements lawful. It also disagreed with the Court of Appeal on whether the existence of an allegedly champertous fee agreement could itself provide a defence to legal proceedings. The costs judgment addressed whether Howley or the taxpayers should pay the costs of the proceedings.

The Supreme Court has ordered that Joseph Howley, the Collector General, receive no costs in proceedings against Paul Howard and Una McClean. It awarded the two defendants half their costs in the Supreme Court, with the amount to be adjudicated if they cannot agree it.

The costs judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Gerard Hogan on 7 October 2026, followed an earlier judgment that upheld the legality of conditional “uplift” fees and “no foal, no fee” arrangements. The appeals arose from arrangements between the Revenue Commissioners and solicitors’ firms under which part of the legal fee depended on the amount of unpaid tax recovered.

The court had previously found the fee arrangements lawful. It also disagreed with the Court of Appeal on whether the existence of an allegedly champertous fee agreement could itself provide a defence to legal proceedings. The costs judgment addressed whether Howley or the taxpayers should pay the costs of the proceedings.

Mr Justice Hogan said Howley had been entirely successful in establishing that the arrangements were lawful and was presumptively entitled to costs under section 169(1) of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. But the court could consider other factors, including whether it was reasonable to litigate the issues.

The judgment said the defendants’ appeals raised complex legal questions of general public importance, with implications for litigation practice and access to justice. Their case had enabled the court to clarify the law on conditional fees and “no foal, no fee” arrangements, benefiting litigants, legal practitioners and the legal system. The judge said the public interest in that clarification outweighed the parties’ private interests and that the defendants should not bear all the costs of securing it.

The court also took account of the defendants’ failure to pay tax liabilities and their unsuccessful appeals. Mr Justice Hogan said they had made wholly unsubstantiated allegations of fraud in the High Court and Court of Appeal. Those matters weighed against awarding them all their costs.

The order was no costs order in either the High Court or Court of Appeal, and an award to the defendants of 50% of their costs in the Supreme Court, to be adjudicated in default of agreement. The Attorney General and the Law Society of Ireland, who appeared as amici curiae, were to bear their own costs.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review