Rayan Restaurant Ltd -v- Gerald Kean Practising as Keans Solicitors & anor [2015] IECA 264 (09 November 2015)

Rayan Restaurant Ltd -v- Gerald Kean Practising as Keans Solicitors & anor [2015] IECA 264 (09 November 2015)

The respondents established a prima facie defence to the appeal and demonstrated that Rayan would be unable to pay their costs if unsuccessful. Rayan failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish special circumstances linking its inability to pay to the respondents' alleged wrongdoing. Therefore, security for costs is warranted under s. 390 of the Companies Act 1963.

Citation
[2015] IECA 264
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Rayan Restaurant Limited; First Named Defendant/respondent: Gerald Kean Practicing as Keans Solicitors; Second Named Defendant/respondent: Francis McGagh
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Security for Costs Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted; appeal stayed pending payment of security.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Professional Negligence, Appeals, Company's Inability to Pay Costs, Special Circumstances Exception
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Company Law Security for Costs Appeals Company's Inability to Pay Costs 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rayan Restaurant Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Gerald Kean Practicing as Keans Solicitors

First Named Defendant/respondent

Francis McGagh

Second Named Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Security for Costs Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants/respondents are entitled to security for costs from the plaintiff/appellant under s. 390 of the Companies Act 1963 pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to justify refusing security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents established a prima facie defence to the appeal and demonstrated that Rayan would be unable to pay their costs if unsuccessful. Rayan failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish special circumstances linking its inability to pay to the respondents' alleged wrongdoing. Therefore, security for costs is warranted under s. 390 of the Companies Act 1963.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted; appeal stayed pending payment of security.

Orders

  • Rayan’s appeal is stayed until it provides €40,528.50 as security for costs to each defendant.