The High Court ordered provisional liquidator Anthony Fitzpatrick to pay the reasonable legal costs of the official liquidator and the Revenue Commissioners after he unsuccessfully sought higher remuneration from the liquidation of United Power Limited.
In a ruling delivered on 5 May 2021, Mr Justice David Keane directed that Mr Fitzpatrick pay the costs of Aiden Murphy, the company’s official liquidator, and Revenue. The costs include reserved costs and the costs of written submissions, and are to be adjudicated if the parties cannot agree them. The judge also prohibited Mr Fitzpatrick from using company assets to pay his own costs or those of Mr Murphy and Revenue for which he was liable.
The ruling dealt with costs following an earlier judgment. On 24 March 2021, the court fixed Mr Fitzpatrick’s remuneration as provisional liquidator at €48,804.12. That total comprised €37,000 in fees, €2,751.32 in expenses and outlay, and VAT at 23% on the combined €39,751.32. He had sought €126,206.01; the judge’s account of the earlier decision said the application was opposed as excessive by Mr Murphy and Revenue.
Revenue had made an open offer in September 2019 to accept remuneration of up to €37,000, subject to the court’s view, and to pay €13,196.60 towards legal costs relating to a failed interim injunction application and the remuneration application. Mr Fitzpatrick rejected the offer. The judge found that Mr Fitzpatrick had not beaten it and was entirely unsuccessful in pursuing remuneration substantially above the amount the court found reasonable. He rejected Mr Fitzpatrick’s arguments that the offer included expenses and VAT, or that the costs allowance was inadequate.
Mr Fitzpatrick had asked for his costs to be paid as costs of the liquidation. The judge refused, finding that the application was brought in Mr Fitzpatrick’s personal capacity and that he was not entitled to use company assets to meet the costs of his unsuccessful claim. The court also rejected Revenue’s request to set off its costs against remuneration due to Mr Fitzpatrick. It made no such order, stating that the request more closely resembled a garnishee order and that the issue had not been fully argued.
The ruling concerns costs and final orders following the earlier remuneration decision. It does not determine the amount of the reasonable costs, which remain to be agreed or adjudicated.