The District Court ordered the Child and Family Agency to pay the legal costs incurred by a respondent father in a section 47 child care application brought by the child’s guardian ad litem. The order covered three hearing dates in March 2015 and the father’s costs application, heard on 2 May 2017. Costs are to be measured under the District Court Rules if the parties cannot agree the amount.
The ruling was limited to the father’s participation in the section 47 application. The court had already refused to make a general order requiring the Agency to pay his costs for the wider proceedings under sections 17 and 18 of the Child Care Act 1991.
The court said the child’s placement had been decided to be unsuitable in October 2014. It found that the Agency took no practical steps to move the child until after the guardian ad litem applied to the court under section 47. That application sought directions concerning the child’s onward placement, the transition and safety plan, and supports for the child.
The father was made a party to the application and participated in hearings on three dates during March 2015. At the final hearing, the court was told that the child had moved placement between the second and third hearing dates. The judgment gives no specific dates for those hearings, with the month redacted in the source.
The court found that the Agency’s unreasonable and untimely inaction had necessitated the guardian ad litem’s application. It said the father was entitled and required to participate, and that leaving him to bear the resulting legal costs would cause a particular injustice. The court also described child care proceedings as complex and said the interests of justice were best served by legal representation.
The judgment records that the court considered the Supreme Court’s costs principles in CFA v OA [2015] IESC 52. It does not award the father costs for the broader care proceedings, decide the underlying care order, or state the amount of costs ultimately payable.