Butler Duignan v Chief Appeals Officer & Ors (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 188 (15 July 2024)

Butler Duignan v Chief Appeals Officer & Ors (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 188 (15 July 2024)

There was no causal nexus between the institution of proceedings and the administrative decisions; the decisions were not expedited by the proceedings, and the delay, while unexplained, did not justify an award of costs. The High Court judge acted within his discretion and correctly applied the relevant legal principles. The appeals were dismissed and no order for costs was made in favour of the appellants.

Citation
[2024] IECA 188
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Ciara Butler Duignan; Applicant/appellant: Caroline Hughes; Respondents: Chief Appeals Officer, Social Welfare Appeals Office and Minister for Social Protection
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
15 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Costs After Proceedings Became Moot
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs in Moot Proceedings, Judicial Review, Mandamus, Delay in Administrative Decision Making, Discretion in Awarding Costs
Administrative Law Social Welfare Law Civil Procedure Costs in Moot Proceedings Judicial Review Mandamus Delay in Administrative Decision Making Discretion in Awarding Costs

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ciara Butler Duignan

Applicant/appellant

Caroline Hughes

Applicant/appellant

Chief Appeals Officer, Social Welfare Appeals Office and Minister for Social Protection

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Appeal From High Court Decision on Costs After Proceedings Became Moot

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing costs to appellants after proceedings became moot due to administrative decisions.
  2. 2 Whether there was a causal nexus between the institution of proceedings and the administrative decisions rendered.
  3. 3 Whether the delay by the respondents justified the institution of proceedings and an award of costs.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no causal nexus between the institution of proceedings and the administrative decisions; the decisions were not expedited by the proceedings, and the delay, while unexplained, did not justify an award of costs. The High Court judge acted within his discretion and correctly applied the relevant legal principles. The appeals were dismissed and no order for costs was made in favour of the appellants.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • no order as to costs in favour of appellants; respondents entitled to costs of the appeal unless appellants successfully argue otherwise within 14 days