Framus Ltd & Ors v CRH Plc & Ors (Approved) (Rev1) [2024] IECA 211 (02 August 2024)

Framus Ltd & Ors v CRH Plc & Ors (Approved) (Rev1) [2024] IECA 211 (02 August 2024)

The respondents were entirely successful in the appeal and no grounds were demonstrated to justify departure from the default rule that costs follow the event; all costs are awarded to the respondents against the first named appellant to the extent of separate representation.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] IECA 211
Parties
Appellant: Framus Limited; Appellant: Amantiss Enterprises Limited (in voluntary liquidation); Appellant: Wilbury Limited (in voluntary liquidation); Respondent: CRH Plc; Respondent: Irish Cement Limited; Respondent: Roadstone Provinces Limited; Respondent: Roadstone Dublin Limited; Respondent: Tradburn Limited; Respondent: Readymix Plc; Respondent: Kilsaran Concrete Products Limited; Respondent: CPI Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
02 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Costs awarded to respondents against first named appellant; first named appellant's application for costs refused.
Legal Topics
Costs, Delay in Prosecution, Competition Law, Appellate Procedure
Civil Procedure Costs Delay in Prosecution Competition Law Appellate Procedure

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Framus Limited

Appellant

Amantiss Enterprises Limited (in voluntary liquidation)

Appellant

Wilbury Limited (in voluntary liquidation)

Appellant

CRH Plc

Respondent

Irish Cement Limited

Respondent

Roadstone Provinces Limited

Respondent

Roadstone Dublin Limited

Respondent

Tradburn Limited

Respondent

Readymix Plc

Respondent

Kilsaran Concrete Products Limited

Respondent

CPI Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Costs Determination Following Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are entitled to costs following their success in striking out the appeal for inordinate and inexcusable delay
  2. 2 Whether there are grounds to depart from the default rule that costs follow the event under s.169(1) of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents were entirely successful in the appeal and no grounds were demonstrated to justify departure from the default rule that costs follow the event; all costs are awarded to the respondents against the first named appellant to the extent of separate representation.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to respondents against first named appellant; first named appellant's application for costs refused.

Orders

  • One set of costs to 1st to 5th respondents jointly represented, one set to 6th respondent, one set to 7th respondent, one set to 8th respondent, all against first named appellant, including reserved costs, costs of submissions, and certificate for Senior Counsel for each legal team.
  • No order as to costs in favour of the first named appellant.