D v D [No. 2] (Approved) [2026] IEHC 43 (23 January 2026)
The application was not a straightforward binary dispute and no party was 'entirely successful' within the meaning of s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. The nature of the proceedings, the absence of misconduct, and the welfare focus mean that justice, equity, compassion, and the children's welfare all militate against making any order as to costs.
- Citation
- [2026] IEHC 43
- Parties
- Appellant: D; Respondent: D
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 23 January 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Family Law Relocation Application (costs) / Post Judgment Costs Application
- Outcome
- No order as to costs
- Legal Topics
- Relocation of Children, Costs in Family Law Proceedings, Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 S.169
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
D
Appellant
D
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Family Law Relocation Application (costs) / Post Judgment Costs Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proceedings were binary for costs purposes
- 2 Whether either party was 'entirely successful' under s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act 2015
- 3 Whether an order for costs should be made in family law proceedings
Ratio Decidendi
The application was not a straightforward binary dispute and no party was 'entirely successful' within the meaning of s.169(1) Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. The nature of the proceedings, the absence of misconduct, and the welfare focus mean that justice, equity, compassion, and the children's welfare all militate against making any order as to costs.
Court Disposition
No order as to costs
Orders
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment