Flatley v Austin Newport Group Ltd & Ors (Approved) [2025] IEHC 461 (15 August 2025)

Flatley v Austin Newport Group Ltd & Ors (Approved) [2025] IEHC 461 (15 August 2025)

The plaintiff is ordinarily resident in Monaco, outside the EU and Lugano Convention states, and has not demonstrated sufficient assets in the jurisdiction to meet a potential costs order. The evidence of intention to return to Ireland is insufficient to establish ordinary residence. Delay by the defendants in bringing the application was explained and not prejudicial. No special circumstances exist to refuse security for costs. Security for costs is therefore ordered against the plaintiff.

Citation
[2025] IEHC 461
Parties
Plaintiff: Michael Flatley; First Defendant: Austin Newport Group Limited; Second Defendant: David Cushion; Third Defendant (lloyd's Defendant): MS Amlin Underwriting Limited; Fourth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant): AXA XL Underwriting Agencies Limited; Fifth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant): Hamilton Managing Agency Limited; Sixth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant): Hiscox Société Anonyme; Seventh Defendant (lloyd's Defendant): Lloyds Insurance Company
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
15 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Commercial Proceedings / Post Pleadings, Post Discovery, Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Security for costs ordered against the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Judgments, Ordinary Residence, Delay in Applications, Asset Sufficiency
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Insurance Law Security for Costs Jurisdiction Enforcement of Judgments Ordinary Residence Delay in Applications +1 more

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Flatley

Plaintiff

Austin Newport Group Limited

First Defendant

David Cushion

Second Defendant

MS Amlin Underwriting Limited

Third Defendant (lloyd's Defendant)

AXA XL Underwriting Agencies Limited

Fourth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant)

Hamilton Managing Agency Limited

Fifth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant)

Hiscox Société Anonyme

Sixth Defendant (lloyd's Defendant)

Lloyds Insurance Company

Seventh Defendant (lloyd's Defendant)

Procedural Posture

Security for Costs Application in Ongoing Commercial Proceedings / Post Pleadings, Post Discovery, Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is ordinarily resident outside Ireland, the EU, or Lugano Convention states for the purpose of Order 29 security for costs
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to refuse security for costs
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff has sufficient assets in the jurisdiction to meet any costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is ordinarily resident in Monaco, outside the EU and Lugano Convention states, and has not demonstrated sufficient assets in the jurisdiction to meet a potential costs order. The evidence of intention to return to Ireland is insufficient to establish ordinary residence. Delay by the defendants in bringing the application was explained and not prejudicial. No special circumstances exist to refuse security for costs. Security for costs is therefore ordered against the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to provide security for costs in favour of the first defendant and the Lloyd's Defendants, quantum and form to be determined by the Master.