The High Court has made no order for costs in judicial review proceedings brought by a mother and her minor daughter against Dublin City Council over its refusal to give them priority on the social housing list.
SM and her daughter KM were granted leave in November 2024 to challenge an August 2 decision refusing them priority on exceptional social grounds. SM told the court that she and her daughter had experienced domestic violence involving her former partner and that she wanted them to live free from danger.
They had been on the ordinary social housing list since June 2018. After the proceedings began, the Council said they had reached the offer zone for choice-based lettings because of their time on that list. SM was formally offered accommodation on April 11, 2025 and accepted it, making the judicial review moot because there was no longer a practical need for the court to decide the priority dispute.
The remaining issue was who should pay the legal costs.
Mr Justice Cian Ferriter rejected the argument that SM had effectively won the case simply because she ultimately obtained housing. The proceedings challenged the Council's refusal to grant priority status, and the Council never reversed that decision.
The judge accepted evidence from a senior Council official that the home was offered through the ordinary operation of the housing list rather than as a response to the litigation. He therefore found that the Council had demonstrated that the event which made the case moot arose from its normal housing allocation functions.
The court also declined to award costs on wider interests-of-justice grounds. While the judge said SM had acted reasonably given the situation she believed herself and her daughter to be in, he could not determine the disputed merits of the underlying priority decision when deciding costs.
Each side was therefore left to bear its own costs. The judge's provisional view was that the same should apply to the costs hearing itself.