Casey -v- Private Security Appeals Board [2009] IEHC 547 (11 December 2009)

Casey -v- Private Security Appeals Board [2009] IEHC 547 (11 December 2009)

The Private Security Appeals Board is a quasi-judicial body analogous to a judge; it did not participate in the proceedings and acted without mala fides or impropriety. Therefore, it should generally have immunity from costs, and no order for costs is made against it.

Citation
[2009] IEHC 547
Parties
Applicant: Robert Casey; Respondent: Private Security Appeals Board; Notice Party: Private Security Authority
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
11 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Application
Outcome
No order for costs against the Private Security Appeals Board; costs awarded against the Private Security Authority.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Costs, Quasi Judicial Bodies, Private Security Services Act 2004

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Casey

Applicant

Private Security Appeals Board

Respondent

Private Security Authority

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Judgment Costs Application

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded against a quasi-judicial body that did not participate in judicial review proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Private Security Appeals Board is analogous to a judge for the purposes of costs immunity

Ratio Decidendi

The Private Security Appeals Board is a quasi-judicial body analogous to a judge; it did not participate in the proceedings and acted without mala fides or impropriety. Therefore, it should generally have immunity from costs, and no order for costs is made against it.

Court Disposition

No order for costs against the Private Security Appeals Board; costs awarded against the Private Security Authority.

Orders

  • Applicant awarded costs against the Private Security Authority
  • No order for costs against the Private Security Appeals Board