Egan v The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland & Ors (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 32 (17 February 2023)

Egan v The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland & Ors (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 32 (17 February 2023)

The plaintiff failed to establish any basis to depart from the general rule that the successful party is entitled to costs. Delays attributable to the Firm were not material to the appeal, and the notice of indemnity was irrelevant after dismissal of the claim against the Firm.

Citation
[2023] IECA 32
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Brian Egan; First Named Defendant: The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland; Second Named Defendant/respondent: John G. Dillon Leetch and Robert Potter Cogan formerly practicing under the style and title of Dillon Leetch & Sons Solicitors now John G. Dillon Leech practicing under the style and title of Dillon Leetch and Comerford Solicitors; Third Named Defendant: Sean Moloney and Associates
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Costs Ruling After Principal Judgment
Outcome
Costs awarded to the Firm (second named defendant/respondent) against the plaintiff/appellant for the appeal, including costs of written submissions on costs.
Legal Topics
Costs, Appeal, Indemnity and Contribution
Civil Procedure Costs Appeal Indemnity and Contribution

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Egan

Plaintiff/appellant

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland

First Named Defendant

John G. Dillon Leetch and Robert Potter Cogan formerly practicing under the style and title of Dillon Leetch & Sons Solicitors now John G. Dillon Leech practicing under the style and title of Dillon Leetch and Comerford Solicitors

Second Named Defendant/respondent

Sean Moloney and Associates

Third Named Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Costs Ruling After Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the successful respondent is entitled to costs of the appeal
  2. 2 Whether any factors justify departure from the general rule on costs under s. 169 of the Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to establish any basis to depart from the general rule that the successful party is entitled to costs. Delays attributable to the Firm were not material to the appeal, and the notice of indemnity was irrelevant after dismissal of the claim against the Firm.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the Firm (second named defendant/respondent) against the plaintiff/appellant for the appeal, including costs of written submissions on costs.

Orders

  • Firm is entitled to costs of the appeal against the plaintiff, including costs of written submissions on the costs issue.