The Supreme Court has ruled that neither side should recover its costs of a successful appeal by Donegal County Council concerning the validity of a District Court summons, but Conor Quinn must pay the council's costs in the High Court.
The costs ruling, delivered by Mr Justice Peter Charleton on 6 March 2026, followed the Supreme Court's substantive judgment of 13 May 2025.
The underlying case concerned planning enforcement proceedings against Quinn and whether a firm of solicitors could apply to a District Court clerk for the issue of a summons on behalf of a body legally authorised to prosecute an offence.
Quinn had argued that the summons was invalid because it had not been issued on the application of a person authorised by law. The High Court accepted the argument that an individual could apply for a summons but that the applicant had to be a natural person.
Donegal County Council appealed successfully. The Supreme Court held in its earlier judgment that a solicitors' firm may apply for a summons on behalf of an authorised prosecutor. For the relevant legislation, a person could include an individual, corporation or unincorporated association acting for the prosecutor.
The remaining issue was who should pay the legal costs.
Quinn argued that the case clarified an important point affecting the daily operation of the District Court and that this justified an award of costs in his favour. The council relied on its success and sought costs in both the High Court and Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the broad public importance of the issue justified making no costs order against Quinn for the Supreme Court appeal. However, the circumstances were not exceptional enough to award him his own costs.
The court also ruled that no costs could be awarded against the Attorney General, who had joined to assist the court on the legal issue. The High Court costs order in Quinn's favour was reversed, with those costs awarded against him instead.