The High Court has directed that former solicitor Paul Lambert’s costs in a defamation case be referred for taxation, while leaving open who, if anyone, must ultimately pay them.
In a judgment delivered on 27 November 2015, Mr Justice Gilligan said the plaintiff accepted that his solicitor-client costs should be taxed, on the basis that both sides bear their own costs. The plaintiff reserved the right to dispute the basis of the retainer before the taxing master. His consent did not bind his parents, who deny that they were Lambert’s clients or agreed to pay his fees.
Lambert sought taxation of costs against the plaintiff and his parents. The judgment records that he claimed €1.95 million jointly and severally. The proceedings had not gone beyond the interlocutory stage: applications for restraining orders against certain defendants were partly successful, while an application concerning newspaper reporting was unsuccessful.
The underlying case arose after a taxi passenger left without paying a fare in Monkstown in November 2011. Video of the passenger was posted online, and the plaintiff, who was in Japan, was wrongly identified as the passenger. His parents contacted Lambert in January 2012, and legal instructions were taken. The plaintiff’s retainer with Lambert ended in June 2013; he is now represented by another firm.
The parents objected to the costs application, saying they had no binding agreement to pay. The judge said disputes about the retainer, liability and other issues could be determined in later proceedings. If Lambert seeks to recover taxed costs, he will have to bring proceedings against the plaintiff and his parents.
The order is without prejudice to any defences either the plaintiff or his parents may raise in those proceedings. The judge said he would hear submissions on the form of the order to be drawn up. The judgment does not decide that the parents were clients, that any party owes the claimed amount, or the final amount of any recoverable costs.