The High Court has refused to stay execution of a costs order in favour of First Names Trust Company (Ireland) Limited, after finding that the defendants had not shown a stay was required in the interests of justice.
In a costs ruling delivered on 20 February 2024, Mr Justice Mark Heslin said the defendants did not contest the plaintiff’s entitlement to the costs of their motion, with those costs to be adjudicated if the parties could not agree. They sought a stay on execution until the underlying proceedings were determined.
The motion had sought dismissal of the proceedings for delay. In a judgment delivered on 24 January 2024, the court found that the defendants had failed to meet any of the three limbs of the Primor test. The costs ruling records that the plaintiff had warned the defendants in August 2022 that pursuing the motion would add costs, and that the defendants declined a November 2023 proposal to strike it out without an order for costs.
The defendants argued that a stay could allow costs orders to be set off against one another later, including if the plaintiff applied to amend its statement of claim. The judge said it was uncertain whether such an amendment application would be made and inappropriate to predict what order a future court might make. He also noted that the defendants already had an order against them for the costs of an earlier motion relating to their late defence, while costs of a later motion about unanswered particulars had been reserved.
The judge said there was no evidence that refusing a stay would cause harm, prevent a fair determination of the case or leave the defendants unable to fund their defence. He concluded that the plaintiff had not established that a stay was necessary and considered the greater risk of injustice would arise from granting one.
The court granted only a limited stay: if there is an appeal against the judgment, the stay will run until the first return date before the Court of Appeal. The defendants would have to apply to that court for any further stay. A final order reflecting the ruling was to be provided within seven days.