Dublin International Arena -v- Campus and Stadium Ireland & Ors [2007] IESC 48 (25 October 2007)

Dublin International Arena -v- Campus and Stadium Ireland & Ors [2007] IESC 48 (25 October 2007)

The delay by the respondents in seeking security for costs in judicial review proceedings under the Remedies Directive constituted a special circumstance justifying refusal of such orders, as the delay was contrary to the requirement for rapid and effective remedies under both national and EU law.

Citation
[2007] IESC 48
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Dublin International Arena Limited; First Respondent: Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited; Second Respondent: The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation; Third Respondent: Ireland; Fourth Respondent: The Attorney General; Notice Party: Rohcon Limited; Notice Party: Dublin Waterworld Limited; Notice Party: Waterworld (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from High Court) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Judicial Review, Delay in Proceedings, Remedies Directive, Special Circumstances Exception
Administrative Law Public Procurement Civil Procedure Security for Costs Judicial Review Delay in Proceedings Remedies Directive Special Circumstances Exception

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dublin International Arena Limited

Applicant/appellant

Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited

First Respondent

The Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation

Second Respondent

Ireland

Third Respondent

The Attorney General

Fourth Respondent

Rohcon Limited

Notice Party

Dublin Waterworld Limited

Notice Party

Waterworld (UK) Limited

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from High Court) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs can be ordered in judicial review proceedings under the Remedies Directive
  2. 2 Whether delay in seeking security for costs constitutes a 'special circumstance' justifying refusal of such orders

Ratio Decidendi

The delay by the respondents in seeking security for costs in judicial review proceedings under the Remedies Directive constituted a special circumstance justifying refusal of such orders, as the delay was contrary to the requirement for rapid and effective remedies under both national and EU law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Refusal of security for costs to respondents due to delay
  • No order for security for costs against the appellant