The High Court has refused L.M. leave to seek judicial review of two certificates assessing costs payable to his former wife, A.M., in related Circuit Court and High Court proceedings. Mr Justice Meenan extended the time for bringing the application but found no arguable basis to challenge the assessments.
The certificates followed a two-day taxation hearing on 24 and 25 July 2018. The costs arose from equity proceedings in the Cork Circuit Court and an unsuccessful appeal to the High Court. The applicant sought to have the certificates quashed and argued, among other things, that the County Registrar signed them before giving reasons for initial determinations, limiting his opportunity to object.
The court granted an extension of time under Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts. It noted that the certificates were issued on 24 and 25 July 2018, with written reasons provided on 2 August. Although the applicant had not seriously explained why he waited until late October to begin the process, the judge accepted that he had intended to seek certiorari within the three-month period and appeared to believe the leave application could only be heard on a Monday. The first available Monday was a bank holiday.
In considering whether the application disclosed an arguable case, the judge reviewed affidavits, correspondence and the County Registrar’s written determinations. Evidence before the court was that the applicant had access to relevant files before the taxation hearing and was given an opportunity to contest each item claimed. The judge concluded that the procedures before and during the hearing were fair and that the applicant had been given an adequate opportunity to make submissions.
The judge rejected the complaint about “initial determinations”, finding that it arose from confusion between the rules governing taxation before a Taxing Master and those applicable to the Circuit Court process. He said the applicant’s reliance on the Supreme Court decision in *D.M.P.T. v. Moran* was misplaced because that case concerned proceedings before a Taxing Master.
The County Registrar’s determinations set out the costs claimed and applied the relevant legal principles and statutory provisions. The judge also noted that the applicant had himself introduced earlier proceedings for comparison during the taxation. He said an appeal was the appropriate route to challenge the determinations, but the applicant had not appealed them.
The court refused leave to seek judicial review. It did not grant the declarations requested in a further motion, saying they did not arise. The judgment records that a sum of €75,000 had previously been retained in court pending taxation of costs orders; it does not state that this application ordered the release or payment of that sum.