The High Court has ruled that legal costs arising from an unsuccessful application by Meta Platforms Ireland should ultimately follow the outcome of its wider statutory appeal against the Data Protection Commission.
Ms Justice Nessa Cahill delivered the costs judgment on 12 January 2026. Meta had previously sought to have preliminary legal issues in its case heard at the same time as, or immediately after, identical issues in separate proceedings involving LinkedIn Ireland and the DPC.
That application was refused on 31 October 2025. The DPC, having succeeded on the motion, then sought its costs. Meta argued that no costs order should yet be made or, alternatively, that the costs should be 'costs in the cause'.
The High Court rejected Meta's argument that the motion remained live. The specific application had been finally determined, even though the outcome of the LinkedIn proceedings will have significant consequences for Meta's appeal and several related cases.
However, the judge did not award the DPC its costs outright. She held that an order making costs 'costs in the cause' is itself a valid costs award rather than a reservation of the question for later determination.
Ms Justice Cahill noted that the DPC had been entirely successful, creating a general presumption in its favour. But she found that Meta's motion was not unreasonable. It raised significant and novel questions, clarified that the LinkedIn preliminary issues would directly affect Meta's proceedings and confirmed that no further steps would be taken in the appeal until those issues were determined.
The motion also clarified that further, different preliminary issues might later be considered if they could narrow Meta's appeal.
The court therefore ordered that the recoverable costs incurred by both Meta and the DPC on the motion be costs in the cause. No costs order was made for the State. The judge provisionally proposed no order for the additional costs of arguing the costs issue itself.