The High Court has refused a plaintiff’s application to remit her personal injury proceedings to the Dublin Circuit Court, finding that she had not explained why she waited until 2022 to seek the move and that a Circuit Court transfer could delay the trial.
The motion, issued on 2 June 2022, sought remittal under Order 49(7) of the Rules of the Superior Courts. The judge said Order 63(1)(33) did not apply because that provision required consent. The application was heard in October 2022, before the scheduled High Court trial date of 20 October.
The claim arose from an alleged trip and fall on 17 November 2015. Dublin City Council was originally named as defendant. Duggan Brothers (Contractors) Limited was joined in July 2020 after the plaintiff alleged that one or other defendant occupied the location and carried out works that caused her fall. Duggan Brothers pleaded that the claim against it was statute-barred and that the plaintiff had delayed in pursuing the proceedings. Those were its pleaded positions, not findings made on this motion.
The plaintiff’s counsel argued that a Circuit Court hearing could reduce costs, including by avoiding senior counsel’s fees and making it easier to agree medical reports. Counsel also relied on Court of Appeal guidance that serious consideration should be given to remittal where expected damages fall within Circuit Court jurisdiction.
Duggan Brothers opposed the application, arguing that it came too late. The judge noted that the plaintiff’s solicitor’s affidavit said an orthopaedic surgeon concluded in September 2019 that surgery was not required, a fact the judge described as significant to the remittal request. Duggan Brothers had prepared for a High Court trial and, it argued, the Circuit Court could not award the difference between High Court and Circuit Court costs for the period from July 2020 to June 2022. No figures for that potential difference were before the court.
The judge said the plaintiff had not offered an accommodation to Duggan Brothers for that costs issue, despite an opportunity to address it. He was not satisfied that an earlier High Court decision relied on by Duggan Brothers could be distinguished. Although Court of Appeal guidance on costs inclined him towards remittal, he also considered the right to a hearing within a reasonable time and evidence cited by the parties that a Dublin Circuit Court trial date could take 12 to 18 months to obtain.
The application was refused. The judge said the parties could apply on 20 October for a new High Court trial date, after the scheduled trial had been adjourned pending the motion. He added that the High Court trial judge might consider the plaintiff’s delayed remittal request, which Dublin City Council had not opposed, in any later application for a differential costs order. No such later costs decision was made in this judgment.