The High Court has ordered the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to pay Omar Halowane’s costs up to and including a hearing on costs, with the amount to be taxed if the parties cannot agree.
Ms Justice Finlay Geoghegan delivered the costs judgment on 30 July 2008 in a judicial review case. The substantive dispute became moot after the Minister decided on 20 February 2007 to grant Halowane temporary leave to remain in the State until 20 February 2010. The judgment does not set out the underlying grounds of the proposed judicial review.
The case had been listed for a leave application. After the Minister’s decision, the State solicitor’s office offered fixed sums towards costs, initially €7,500 plus VAT and later €12,500 plus VAT. Halowane’s solicitors said on 2 March 2007 that he would agree to have the proceedings struck out if the Minister agreed to pay his reasonable costs, with the amount taxed if agreement could not be reached.
The Minister did not accept that form of order and sought a hearing to determine costs. At the July 2007 hearing, the Minister accepted that Halowane was entitled to costs, but argued that they should run only to 1 March 2007, when the first fixed-sum offer was made. Alternatively, the Minister asked the court to limit the proportion of costs payable, citing the applicant’s solicitors’ refusal to negotiate the offered sums.
The judge rejected that argument. She said Halowane was not obliged to accept an offered amount or negotiate the amount of costs. He had agreed to strike out the proceedings on the basis that reasonable costs would be taxed if the parties could not agree. The judge found that the Minister’s refusal to agree to that order, followed by its request for a costs hearing, caused the additional costs.
The order covers costs through the costs hearing, with taxation in default of agreement. The judgment records that the substantive application had become moot before any leave hearing; it does not decide the merits of the proposed judicial review.