Sheehan -v- Corr [2017] IESC 44 (15 June 2017)

Sheehan -v- Corr [2017] IESC 44 (15 June 2017)

The Supreme Court held that the correct methodology for assessing a solicitor's instructions fee requires the Taxing Master to ascertain the nature and extent of the work done, by whom and at what level, and to consider all relevant factors under Order 99, rule 37(22), including but not limited to time and labour expended. Time is a significant factor but not the sole or primary determinant; complexity, skill, responsibility, and other intangibles must also be weighed. Retrospective reconstruction of time may be permissible where records are lacking, but the absence of records is a matter for the claimant solicitor. The Taxing Master has discretion to allow or disallow costs for multiple...

Citation
[2017] IESC 44
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Isabelle Sheehan (an infant suing by her mother and next friend Catherine Sheehan); Defendant/appellant: David Corr
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
15 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of the Court of Appeal set aside; order of the High Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Taxation of Costs, Solicitor's Instructions Fee, Party and Party Costs, Review of Taxing Master's Decision
Civil Procedure Costs Taxation of Costs Solicitor's Instructions Fee Party and Party Costs Review of Taxing Master's Decision

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isabelle Sheehan (an infant suing by her mother and next friend Catherine Sheehan)

Plaintiff/respondent

David Corr

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct methodology for assessing a solicitor's instructions fee on taxation of costs?
  2. 2 To what extent should time spent be prioritised over other criteria in fixing costs under Order 99, rule 37(22)?
  3. 3 Is retrospective reconstruction of time spent permissible and in what circumstances?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the correct methodology for assessing a solicitor's instructions fee requires the Taxing Master to ascertain the nature and extent of the work done, by whom and at what level, and to consider all relevant factors under Order 99, rule 37(22), including but not limited to time and labour expended. Time is a significant factor but not the sole or primary determinant; complexity, skill, responsibility, and other intangibles must also be weighed. Retrospective reconstruction of time may be permissible where records are lacking, but the absence of records is a matter for the claimant solicitor. The Taxing Master has discretion to allow or disallow costs for multiple...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of the Court of Appeal set aside; order of the High Court affirmed.

Orders

  • The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Court of Appeal remitting the matter to the Taxing Master.
  • The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the High Court upholding the Taxing Master's assessment of the solicitor's instructions fee.