O'Keeffe -v- Hickey [2009] IESC 39 (06 May 2009)

O'Keeffe -v- Hickey [2009] IESC 39 (06 May 2009)

Given the exceptional circumstances of the case, including its status as a test case on complex and novel issues of public importance involving the State, the Court exercised its discretion to refuse the State's application for costs and made no order for costs against the appellant.

Citation
[2009] IESC 39
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Louise O'Keeffe; Defendant: Leo Hickey; Defendants/respondents: The Minister for Education and Science, Ireland and the Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
06 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Ruling on Costs After Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
No order as to costs; State's application for costs refused; previous order for costs in High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Costs, Vicarious Liability, Sexual Assault, Test Case, State Liability
Civil Procedure Tort Law Constitutional Law Costs Vicarious Liability Sexual Assault Test Case State Liability

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louise O'Keeffe

Plaintiff/appellant

Leo Hickey

Defendant

The Minister for Education and Science, Ireland and the Attorney General

Defendants/respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Ruling on Costs After Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the general rule that costs follow the event should apply in a test case involving the State and complex issues of vicarious liability for sexual assault by a teacher

Ratio Decidendi

Given the exceptional circumstances of the case, including its status as a test case on complex and novel issues of public importance involving the State, the Court exercised its discretion to refuse the State's application for costs and made no order for costs against the appellant.

Court Disposition

No order as to costs; State's application for costs refused; previous order for costs in High Court set aside.

Orders

  • No order for costs against the appellant in the Supreme Court appeal.
  • Order for costs in favour of the State in the High Court set aside.