County Monaghan Anti-Pylon Ltd -v- Eirgrid PLC [2012] IEHC 103 (30 March 2012)

County Monaghan Anti-Pylon Ltd -v- Eirgrid PLC [2012] IEHC 103 (30 March 2012)

The court exercised its discretion to refuse an order for security for costs because the plaintiff's inability to pay was caused by the defendant's actions, constituting special circumstances, and there was evidence of loss related to the abandoned oral hearing.

Citation
[2012] IEHC 103
Parties
Plaintiff: County Monaghan Anti-Pylon Limited; Defendant: Eirgrid PLC
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory
Outcome
application for security for costs refused
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Special Circumstances, Duty of Care, Negligence, Planning Applications
Company Law Civil Procedure Planning Law Security for Costs Special Circumstances Duty of Care Negligence Planning Applications

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

County Monaghan Anti-Pylon Limited

Plaintiff

Eirgrid PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to an order for security for costs against the plaintiff company under s. 390 of the Companies Act 1963
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to justify refusal of such an order

Ratio Decidendi

The court exercised its discretion to refuse an order for security for costs because the plaintiff's inability to pay was caused by the defendant's actions, constituting special circumstances, and there was evidence of loss related to the abandoned oral hearing.

Court Disposition

application for security for costs refused

Orders

  • No order for security for costs against the plaintiff company