Judgment: 2025-05-07 · Court archive

Court of Appeal awards appeal costs to Dundrum Retail after dismissing challenge

The court said the appellant’s reliance on the Supreme Court’s Heather Hill judgment did not affect the costs review or the earlier proceedings.

Court of Appeal · [2025] IECA 95

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • An Bord Pleanála (Defendant)
  • Dundrum Retail Limited Partnership
What

The court said the appellant’s reliance on the Supreme Court’s Heather Hill judgment did not affect the costs review or the earlier proceedings.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 24 October 2024

    The costs ruling followed the principal judgment delivered on 24 October 2024, which dismissed the appeal. The present ruling decided the costs of that appeal; it did not revisit the underlying judicial review orders.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal has awarded the costs of an appeal to Dundrum Retail Limited Partnership, after dismissing the appeal in October 2024 and finding the proceedings misconceived and an abuse of process.

The Court of Appeal has awarded the costs of an appeal to Dundrum Retail Limited Partnership, after dismissing the appeal in October 2024 and finding the proceedings misconceived and an abuse of process.

In a costs ruling delivered electronically on 7 May 2025, Mr Justice Noonan said the second respondent had been entirely successful and was entitled to its costs. Justices Whelan and Pilkington authorised him to record their agreement.

The appeal had concerned a High Court review of a determination by the Legal Costs Adjudicator under section 161(5) of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. The court said the appellant had sought to revisit earlier final orders and judgments in judicial review proceedings, rather than address the adjudication of costs.

The appellant argued in written submissions that no costs order should be made against him, relying on the Supreme Court’s 2022 judgment in Heather Hill Management Co. CLG. and McGoldrick v An Bord Pleanála. The court rejected that argument. Mr Justice Noonan said Heather Hill had no bearing on an application for review under section 161 and had also been irrelevant to the original proceedings, which concerned whether the appellant had submitted a valid appeal to An Bord Pleanála.

The costs ruling followed the principal judgment delivered on 24 October 2024, which dismissed the appeal. The present ruling decided the costs of that appeal; it did not revisit the underlying judicial review orders.

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