The Court of Appeal has awarded the defendants the costs of an appeal by Heatherridge Associates Limited, which the court had dismissed in July 2020. It made no order for costs on the defendants’ cross-appeal.
In a ruling dated 3 March 2021, Faherty J. said the defendants were “entirely successful” in resisting Heatherridge’s appeal. The appeal concerned a High Court order granting the company €187,579.92 of a claim exceeding €1.1 million plus VAT, and awarding it only half of its costs up to the defendants’ lodgement on 2 November 2018. The High Court had also ordered Heatherridge to pay the defendants’ costs from that date.
The Court of Appeal had dismissed Heatherridge’s appeal and the defendants’ cross-appeal against the award of half the company’s pre-lodgement costs. After the court indicated that costs would normally follow the event, both sides made submissions on costs.
The defendants sought their costs of the appeal, arguing that they had successfully resisted it. Heatherridge argued that the appeal addressed issues it said the High Court had not dealt with, including the quantum meruit claim, a March 2010 agreement, a declaration of solvency and the allocation of costs. The judge found that Heatherridge had identified no principled reason to depart from the usual rule that the successful party is entitled to costs.
For the cross-appeal, Heatherridge sought its costs, while the defendants argued there should be no order. The judge said the cross-appeal took little time at the hearing and did not materially affect the overall litigation costs. The court therefore made no costs order in relation to it.
The parties also disputed how Heatherridge responded to a request for extracts from the High Court hearing transcript concerning the company directors’ declaration of solvency, sworn on 26 November 2010. The defendants complained that the process generated additional work; Heatherridge disputed that account. The judge said the disagreement did not warrant awarding the defendants post-appeal costs.
The final order awarded the defendants the costs of the appeal, with no order for costs on the cross-appeal.