Permanent TSB Group Holdings Pls v Skoczylas (Approved) [2020] IECA 216 (31 July 2020)

Permanent TSB Group Holdings Pls v Skoczylas (Approved) [2020] IECA 216 (31 July 2020)

The unsuccessful applicant for a stay on a costs order must pay the costs of the successful respondent, as there was no sufficient reason to depart from the normal rule that costs follow the event. The applicant's arguments regarding the necessity of the motion, the length of the hearing, and allegations of bias were rejected as providing no basis for a different costs order.

Citation
[2020] IECA 216
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Permanent TSB Group Holdings PLC; Party Opposing the Application/appellant: Piotr Skoczylas
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Costs of Stay Application After Unsuccessful Application for Stay on Costs Order
Outcome
Costs of stay application awarded to Respondents.
Legal Topics
Costs, Stay of Execution, Capital Reduction, Objective Bias
Civil Procedure Company Law Costs Stay of Execution Capital Reduction Objective Bias

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Permanent TSB Group Holdings PLC

Applicant/respondent

Piotr Skoczylas

Party Opposing the Application/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Costs of Stay Application After Unsuccessful Application for Stay on Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unsuccessful applicant for a stay on a costs order should be liable for the costs of the stay application
  2. 2 Whether there was any basis to depart from the normal rule that costs follow the event
  3. 3 Whether allegations of objective bias against a judge warranted any different order as to costs

Ratio Decidendi

The unsuccessful applicant for a stay on a costs order must pay the costs of the successful respondent, as there was no sufficient reason to depart from the normal rule that costs follow the event. The applicant's arguments regarding the necessity of the motion, the length of the hearing, and allegations of bias were rejected as providing no basis for a different costs order.

Court Disposition

Costs of stay application awarded to Respondents.

Orders

  • Mr Skoczylas to pay the Company the costs of the stay application, subject to adjudication in default of agreement, with a stay on the order for costs in the same terms as the existing stay on the Costs Order.