I.E.G.P. Management Company Ltd by Guarantee v Cosgrove & Ors (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 128 (25 May 2023)

I.E.G.P. Management Company Ltd by Guarantee v Cosgrove & Ors (Unapproved) [2023] IECA 128 (25 May 2023)

The Court of Appeal held that the Architect had established a prima facie defence, particularly on the Statute of Limitations, as the plaintiff failed to show the cause of action accrued within six years of issuing proceedings. The plaintiff's ability to raise a special levy was too uncertain to displace the reason to believe it could not pay costs. No special circumstances or public interest justified refusing security for costs, as the litigation would not be stifled. The High Court's refusal to invite the Architect to mediation was upheld as the claim was insufficiently particularised and the timing was premature.

Citation
[2023] IECA 128
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: IEGP Management Company Limited by Guarantee; Defendant/respondent: Denise Cosgrave (Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Cosgrave, Deceased); Defendant/respondent: Oonagh Cosgrave and Kelly Cosgrave (Executors of the Estate of Peter Cosgrave, Deceased); Defendant/respondent: Michael Cosgrave; Defendant/respondent: Crosgrave Development Unlimited Company; Defendant/respondent: Crosgrave Property Developments Limited; Defendant/respondent: O’Connor Sutton Cronin & Associated Limited; Defendant/respondent: Pat Dunphy Keane Murphy Dunphy Limited trading as KMD Architecture; Defendant/respondent: Gary O’Hare and OLM Surveying Limited trading as OLM Consultancy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders Regarding Security for Costs and Mediation Invitation
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Statute of Limitations, Mediation, Owners' Management Companies, Fire Safety Defects, Public Interest Litigation
Civil Procedure Company Law Construction Law Security for Costs Statute of Limitations Mediation Owners' Management Companies Fire Safety Defects +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IEGP Management Company Limited by Guarantee

Plaintiff/appellant

Denise Cosgrave (Administrator of the Estate of Joseph Cosgrave, Deceased)

Defendant/respondent

Oonagh Cosgrave and Kelly Cosgrave (Executors of the Estate of Peter Cosgrave, Deceased)

Defendant/respondent

Michael Cosgrave

Defendant/respondent

Crosgrave Development Unlimited Company

Defendant/respondent

Crosgrave Property Developments Limited

Defendant/respondent

O’Connor Sutton Cronin & Associated Limited

Defendant/respondent

Pat Dunphy Keane Murphy Dunphy Limited trading as KMD Architecture

Defendant/respondent

Gary O’Hare and OLM Surveying Limited trading as OLM Consultancy

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders Regarding Security for Costs and Mediation Invitation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in ordering the plaintiff to provide security for costs under s.52 of the Companies Act 2014
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in refusing to invite the Architect to consider mediation under s.16(1) of the Mediation Act 2017
  3. 3 Whether the Architect established a prima facie defence, particularly on limitation grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Architect had established a prima facie defence, particularly on the Statute of Limitations, as the plaintiff failed to show the cause of action accrued within six years of issuing proceedings. The plaintiff's ability to raise a special levy was too uncertain to displace the reason to believe it could not pay costs. No special circumstances or public interest justified refusing security for costs, as the litigation would not be stifled. The High Court's refusal to invite the Architect to mediation was upheld as the claim was insufficiently particularised and the timing was premature.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order for security for costs against the plaintiff affirmed
  • Quantum and phasing of security as ordered by the High Court affirmed