Ward v Tower Trade Finance Ltd (Unapproved) [2022] IECA 70 (24 March 2022)

Ward v Tower Trade Finance Ltd (Unapproved) [2022] IECA 70 (24 March 2022)

Mr. Nwadike's conduct in pursuing the appeal, after clear High Court and Court of Appeal judgments rejecting the plaintiff's arguments as unstateable and misconceived, amounted to gross negligence and a serious dereliction of duty to the court, justifying a wasted costs order disallowing his costs as between himself and his client, but not making him personally liable for the defendants' costs.

Citation
[2022] IECA 70
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Philip Ward; Defendant/respondent: Tower Trade Finance (Ireland) Limited; Defendant/respondent: Aengus Burns
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal (costs Judgment) / Post Appeal Costs Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; wasted costs order (disallowing solicitor's costs as between himself and client) made against Mr. Nwadike; defendants awarded costs of the appeal; no order as to costs on the wasted costs application itself.
Legal Topics
Wasted Costs Orders, Solicitor's Duty to Court, Costs in Litigation, Jurisdiction Clauses
Civil Procedure Legal Profession Regulation Wasted Costs Orders Solicitor's Duty to Court Costs in Litigation Jurisdiction Clauses

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Ward

Plaintiff/appellant

Tower Trade Finance (Ireland) Limited

Defendant/respondent

Aengus Burns

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (costs Judgment) / Post Appeal Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a wasted costs order should be made against the plaintiff's solicitor for pursuing an unstateable appeal
  2. 2 Whether the solicitor's conduct amounted to gross negligence or misconduct justifying a wasted costs order

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Nwadike's conduct in pursuing the appeal, after clear High Court and Court of Appeal judgments rejecting the plaintiff's arguments as unstateable and misconceived, amounted to gross negligence and a serious dereliction of duty to the court, justifying a wasted costs order disallowing his costs as between himself and his client, but not making him personally liable for the defendants' costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; wasted costs order (disallowing solicitor's costs as between himself and client) made against Mr. Nwadike; defendants awarded costs of the appeal; no order as to costs on the wasted costs application itself.

Orders

  • Mr. Nwadike disallowed from recovering any costs from the plaintiff, including reimbursement of any payments on account.
  • Defendants awarded costs of the appeal against the plaintiff.