Judgment: 2014-06-05 · Court archive

High Court divides costs after planning judicial review

The court awarded the applicant costs on three planning issues, ordered each side to bear its own costs on two environmental issues, and made a separate costs order over an unsuccessful legal argument.

The High Court · [2014] IEHC 354

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Margaret McCallig (Applicant)
  • An Bord Pleanála (Respondent)
  • Donegal County Council
  • P.J. Molloy
What

The court awarded the applicant costs on three planning issues, ordered each side to bear its own costs on two environmental issues, and made a separate costs order over an unsuccessful legal argument.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Donegal County
  • Donegal
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

McCallig had sought the costs of the entire judicial review, arguing that a 2011 statutory provision applied retrospectively or, alternatively, that the case was of exceptional public importance. The judge rejected both arguments. He said they were neither improperly nor unreasonably made, but added considerably to the length and cost of the proceedings. Neither McCallig nor the respondent and second notice party were awarded costs on those claims.

The High Court has divided costs in a judicial review brought by Margaret McCallig against An Bord Pleanála, Donegal County Council and P.J. Molloy, following an earlier judgment in which McCallig succeeded in having a decision quashed but did not obtain all the relief she sought.

In a costs judgment delivered on 5 June 2014, Mr Justice Herbert said costs should be assessed issue by issue. The case involved three planning and development law issues and two environmental impact assessment issues.

McCallig was awarded her party and party costs of the three planning and development issues. For the two environmental assessment issues, the court directed McCallig, An Bord Pleanála and Molloy each to bear their own costs under section 50B(2) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. Donegal County Council did not participate, and the judge made no costs order for or against it.

McCallig had sought the costs of the entire judicial review, arguing that a 2011 statutory provision applied retrospectively or, alternatively, that the case was of exceptional public importance. The judge rejected both arguments. He said they were neither improperly nor unreasonably made, but added considerably to the length and cost of the proceedings. Neither McCallig nor the respondent and second notice party were awarded costs on those claims.

An Bord Pleanála and Molloy had argued that the statutory rule requiring each side to bear its own costs applied to the whole judicial review, rather than only the environmental assessment issues. The judge rejected that interpretation. He ordered them jointly and severally to pay McCallig’s party and party costs of that portion of the costs application, including relevant parts of submissions, which concerned their unsuccessful argument. The judge described that portion as a minor but not insignificant element of the overall costs.

The costs ruling followed the court’s 9 April 2014 judgment on the costs issues. The source judgment identifies the earlier judicial review decision as having been delivered on 24 January 2013.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review