Judgment: 2021-10-05 · Court archive

Supreme Court brings Butler litigation to an end with costs ruling

After the parties were invited to address costs following its September 2021 final judgment, the Court put its proposed costs order into effect and vacated any stay on costs orders in the lower courts.

The Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Michael and Thomas Butler Limited
  • Michael Butler
  • William Butler (Plaintiff)
  • Bosod Limited
  • Crohan O’Shea (Plaintiff)
  • Thomas O’Driscoll (Defendant)
  • John MacMenamin (Judge)
What

After the parties were invited to address costs following its September 2021 final judgment, the Court put its proposed costs order into effect and vacated any stay on costs orders in the lower courts.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court said those submissions were to be confined to costs. It held that the appellants had instead made further submissions on the merits and raised issues outside that direction. The ruling said those submissions “have no legal status” and that the Court would not consider matters beyond costs.

The Supreme Court has brought the Butler litigation to an end, putting its proposed costs order into effect after the parties were given an opportunity to make brief submissions on costs.

The costs ruling, delivered by Mr Justice John MacMenamin on 5 October 2021, followed the Court’s final judgment on 10 September 2021. That judgment had expressed the preliminary view that the respondents, having succeeded in the appeals, should receive the costs of the appeals and of the hearings before Kelly P, subject to the parties’ submissions.

The Court said those submissions were to be confined to costs. It held that the appellants had instead made further submissions on the merits and raised issues outside that direction. The ruling said those submissions “have no legal status” and that the Court would not consider matters beyond costs.

The Court said the appellants had made no significant argument on costs. It therefore brought the costs order proposed in the final judgment into effect, together with any other orders consequent on that judgment. It also vacated any stay on costs orders in the courts below and said the case was at an end.

The heading lists related proceedings involving Michael and Thomas Butler Limited, Michael Butler and William Butler as plaintiffs, and Bosod Limited, Crohan O’Shea and Thomas O’Driscoll as defendants. It also lists a separate proceeding in which Crohan O’Shea was plaintiff and Michael Butler and William Butler were defendants. The ruling does not set out the amounts of costs.

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