The Supreme Court has declined to stay Quinn Insurance Limited’s underlying High Court proceedings while the amount of security for costs is determined. It ordered Quinn Insurance Limited (QIL) to lodge a further €5 million within seven days as a condition of the case continuing without a stay for now.
The ruling, delivered by Chief Justice Frank Clarke on June 25, 2021, followed an earlier Supreme Court judgment dismissing QIL’s appeal against an order for security for costs. The appeal concerned that security order; the June ruling dealt with the remaining question of whether the wider proceedings should be paused while the amount of security was fixed.
The court said proceedings are normally stayed once security has been ordered, until the security is provided. QIL proposed that the case continue if it provided interim security of €5 million. It argued that this would cover PwC’s likely costs in the period before the full amount was settled. PwC disputed that approach and cited an earlier estimate of €30 million for its costs if the case went to trial. The court noted that PwC had not provided its own estimate of costs likely to arise in the coming months.
The court said the case, which concerns a claim of approximately €800 million, had been ongoing for a considerable time and remained a long way from trial. It considered that avoiding further delay was important, while recognising the need to protect PwC from costs incurred without adequate security. For the interim decision, it treated costs incurred from that point onward as relevant to the risk of prejudice; costs already incurred would be considered when the total security was fixed.
The parties were urged to obtain updated reports on the appropriate security, exchange them and identify areas of agreement and dispute. The court said the process should be expedited, with the case management judge addressing any unresolved issues.
The court directed that the High Court proceedings should be stayed from January 1, 2022 if security in an agreed or determined amount had not been provided, unless the case management judge considered that QIL had acted with appropriate expedition. The judge may also consider whether delay is attributable to either party and, if the process takes longer than expected, whether a stay remains appropriate.
Separately, the Supreme Court awarded PwC the costs of the appeal, but stayed enforcement of that costs order until the proceedings as a whole are complete. It gave liberty to apply to the High Court.