The Supreme Court has dismissed Martin Horan’s appeal against a High Court decision refusing his request for a review of legal costs incurred by his solicitors in the High Court and Supreme Court.
The appeal concerned solicitor-and-client costs charged by Crean, O’Clerigh and O’Dwyer, Solicitors. Horan had asked the High Court to review the taxation of those costs under Order 99, rule 38(3) of the Rules of the Superior Courts.
In April 2011, the High Court refused the motion. The judgment said the court had considered Horan’s motion and affidavit, an affidavit from John O’Dwyer, documents and exhibits, and oral submissions from counsel. The High Court President said Horan had not made a sustainable case for the relief sought. He also considered the review motion incorrect and noted that it was unsupported by evidence from a legal costs accountant or other expert.
Horan appealed, arguing that the High Court judge had erred in law and fact by failing to exercise discretion in his favour when considering costs orders made by the Taxing Master.
In a judgment delivered on 16 December 2016, the Supreme Court said it had considered the appeal papers and oral submissions. It was satisfied that the High Court had made no error and dismissed the appeal. The ruling upheld the refusal of Horan’s review motion; it did not grant the requested review.