The Court of Appeal has ruled that Philip Gaffney must provide €40,000 security for costs in the latest appeal arising from a decade of litigation with members of his family.
The dispute began after his brothers Alan and Derek Gaffney advanced US$372,043.70 in 2015 for a business project involving an order from US broadcaster QVC. Philip Gaffney maintained the money was an investment rather than a repayable loan. After QVC cancelled the order, litigation followed.
In 2022, the High Court found the money was a loan and awarded Alan Gaffney $272,043.70 and Derek Gaffney $100,000 against Philip Gaffney. Subsequent appeals were determined by the Court of Appeal and applications for further appeal were refused by the Supreme Court.
Ms Justice Costello said those proceedings were finally concluded, yet Philip Gaffney continued filing motions seeking to revisit earlier rulings. Related judgment mortgage proceedings concerning The Forge at Naul, Duleek, Co Meath also resulted in orders confirming the respondents’ judgment mortgages over the property and providing for a sale if the debt was not discharged.
The present appeal technically concerns 2018 proceedings in which Alan and Derek Gaffney had sought an equitable mortgage but which were later struck out after both sides agreed they should end. The judge found that Philip Gaffney’s notice of appeal instead sought largely to attack decisions already finally determined in other proceedings.
The court concluded that Alan and Derek Gaffney had shown Philip Gaffney was unlikely to be able to meet a further costs award. Previous costs orders and judgment debts remained unpaid, while other secured debts were also recorded against the property.
Ms Justice Costello found special circumstances justifying security, including the absence of viable grounds for much of the appeal and what she described as oppressive conduct of the litigation. She fixed security at €40,000 rather than applying the usual one-third approach.
The court also found sufficient grounds for a litigation restriction order requiring prior High Court permission before further applications or proceedings against the respondents. However, Philip Gaffney will first be given an opportunity to provide an appropriate undertaking instead.