The Court of Appeal has awarded Michael Scully his full costs of an appeal and a High Court motion concerning recognition in Ireland of a judgment obtained against him in Poland. The costs are to be adjudicated if the parties cannot agree, and the order is stayed pending any application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The ruling, dated 17 June 2024, follows the Court of Appeal’s decision on 30 April 2024 to allow Mr Scully’s appeal against the High Court’s rejection of his application to refuse recognition of the Polish judgment. The appeal succeeded on the question of whether the transfer of individual causes of action to Coucal Ltd. amounted to an impermissible transfer of bare causes of action under Irish rules against maintenance and champerty.
Mr Scully had also argued that the Polish court was improperly constituted, raising a public policy issue about judicial independence. The Court of Appeal did not decide that issue, saying it was unnecessary to address it after finding for him on the assignment issue. In the costs ruling, the court said that the fact it did not decide the judicial independence argument did not mean Mr Scully had been unsuccessful in raising it or had acted unreasonably.
Coucal accepted that Mr Scully should receive his appeal costs. It opposed his claim to full High Court costs, arguing that the judicial independence issue had lengthened the hearing and required expert evidence. It sought an order that each side bear its own High Court costs or, alternatively, that Mr Scully receive half his costs.
The Court of Appeal concluded that raising the judicial independence issue had been reasonable in the circumstances. It said the broader picture was that Mr Scully had advanced two separate public policy arguments and succeeded on one, while the court had not found it necessary to decide the other. It therefore awarded him his full costs of the High Court motion as well as the appeal.
Mr Scully also raised the possibility of a separate costs application involving individual assignors, referring to the jurisdiction described in Moorview Development Ltd. v First Active plc. The court said no such application was before it and made the costs orders without prejudice to any application he may make. Any issues arising from such an application, including the appropriate venue, would be decided by the court hearing it.
The costs orders are stayed for 21 days from perfection of the Court of Appeal order. If an application for leave to appeal is lodged in the Supreme Court within that period, the stay continues until leave is refused, any appeal following granted leave is finalised, or the Supreme Court makes another order about the stay.