Judgment: 2024-10-31 · Court archive

High Court refuses to reopen struck-out proceedings and orders plaintiffs to pay costs

Mr Justice Liam Kennedy declined the plaintiffs’ request for further directions and to reopen his decision. He ordered them to pay the defendants’ costs, with the amount to be determined if not agreed.

High Court · [2024] IEHC 615

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Thomas Farrell & Sons (Carriages) Limited (Plaintiff)
  • Liam Kennedy (Judge)
What

Mr Justice Liam Kennedy declined the plaintiffs’ request for further directions and to reopen his decision. He ordered them to pay the defendants’ costs, with the amount to be determined if not agreed.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The plaintiffs’ submissions disagreed with the earlier judgment and sought further directions to continue litigating the substantive issues. The judge said there was no basis for those directions in light of his ruling and no possible basis to reopen his decision in the circumstances.

The High Court has refused a request by Thomas Farrell & Sons (Carriages) Limited to reopen proceedings that were struck out in September, and has ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendants’ costs.

In a judgment delivered on 31 October 2024, Mr Justice Liam Kennedy said he had struck out the proceedings in a written judgment on 30 September. He had also given provisional views on costs and allowed the parties to make submissions if they considered another costs order appropriate.

The plaintiffs’ submissions disagreed with the earlier judgment and sought further directions to continue litigating the substantive issues. The judge said there was no basis for those directions in light of his ruling and no possible basis to reopen his decision in the circumstances.

The judge said the plaintiffs were entitled to appeal and did not need leave, provided they appealed without delay in accordance with the Rules of the Superior Courts. The appeal statement does not change the present order.

On costs, Mr Justice Kennedy said he remained of the view that the normal presumptive rule should apply. He directed that the plaintiffs pay the defendants’ costs of the proceedings and applications, with the amount to be adjudicated if the parties could not agree. He said there was no basis for a stay and directed that the order be perfected on those terms.

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