The High Court has reserved the legal costs of an injunction application arising from a €405,750.60 debt dispute between property company GDL Management Group plc and building contractor Bert’s Properties Limited.
Bert’s claimed payment for building works invoiced during August and September 2025. GDL disputed aspects of the works, omissions and invoicing. By October, the relationship had reached an impasse, with GDL refusing payment pending completion and certification and Bert’s refusing further work until its invoices were paid.
Bert’s issued a statutory demand for €489,338.02 on 7 November 2025. It later presented a winding-up petition seeking €405,750.60 after acknowledging that two invoices had overstated the amount due.
GDL issued proceedings in January 2026 and sought an interlocutory injunction preventing advertisement or further prosecution of the petition. It said the debt was genuinely disputed and that publication of the petition could have particularly serious consequences because an initial public offering of its shares was imminent.
On 22 January, before a hearing concerning reporting restrictions, GDL said it would pay the corrected amount while maintaining that the petition was an abuse of process. It intended to seek recovery of that money, together with further damages, in the substantive proceedings. Payment followed and Bert’s could no longer pursue the petition as a creditor.
Mr Justice Micheál O’Connell said the injunction motion was therefore effectively withdrawn. Normally that could point towards a costs order against GDL.
However, the central question remains whether Bert’s was actually owed the demanded debt. If GDL establishes at trial that no debt, or less than the statutory threshold, was due, that would strongly support its contention that the winding-up petition should never have been presented.
The judge therefore declined to decide costs immediately. The costs of the injunction motion were reserved to the trial of the substantive action.