AN ARD-CHÚIRT
THE HIGH COURT
[2025] IEHC 229
[Record No. 2018/4660 P]
BETWEEN
ZSOLT REZMUVES
PLAINTIFF
AND
GEORGE O'DONOGHUE
DEFENDANT
Ex Tempore Ruling of Mr. Justice Tony O'Connor delivered in Court 24 at 4:30p.m. on 12th February 2025
1. This is the third ruling following delivery of the main judgment as defined in the ex-tempore judgment relating to the costs in the proceedings between the plaintiff and Patrick Simons, having Record No. 2018/3516 P ("the Simons' costs judgment").
2. The plaintiff, as a result of the agreement among the defendants notified to the Court on the 13 December 2023, will be directed to pay €13,262.50 in respect of injuries sustained in the second collision on 20 April 2016. That was described at para. 6 of the main judgment [2024] IEHC 592 delivered on 16 October 2024 as a "low speed impact" collision by the plaintiff himself.
3. "The record of court dates" dated 29 October 2024 prepared by junior counsel for the defendant is uncontradicted by the plaintiff. The two offers relevant to the costs issue to be determined are the letters marked "without prejudice" dated 13 December 2022 and 9 January 2023 addressed to the plaintiff personally from the solicitor for the defendants against Mr. and Ms. Birney, on behalf of all the defendants in the three sets of proceedings and from the defendants' solicitors respectively. The first of those letters offered €200,000 from all the defendants in the three actions to include all special damages together with costs to be adjudicated in default of agreement up to 29 June 2022 when the plaintiff ceased to be represented by a solicitor. The letter dated 9 January 2023 offered €50,000 with High Court costs in settlement of these proceedings.
4. The personal injuries summons in these proceedings was issued on 23 May 2018 being the last in time of the three sets of proceedings referred to in the main judgment. Although I have stated in the Simons cost judgment and in the Birney's costs ruling that it was understandable for a solicitor to maintain proceedings in the Circuit Court, the Court is not so easily persuaded in these proceedings. The plaintiff, by his own account, indicated that this was a low impact collision. The evidence adduced at trial showed that the plaintiff's complaints, giving rise to the ultimate award of damages, had been established by the time of the collision on 20 April 2016. The plaintiff could have prosecuted these proceedings in the District Court and the award would have been available for consideration at the trial of the other claims.
5. Despite the absence of blame resting with the plaintiff for any of the three collisions, it is still not an excuse to launch and impose on the defendant (Mr. O'Donoghue), High Court proceedings when the plaintiff only recovered damages falling within the District Court jurisdiction.
6. While recognising a potential inequality of treatment for the defendants in the three sets of proceedings by these ex tempore rulings, the Court takes an overall view and finds that there was no good reason advanced by the plaintiff to recover costs in excess of a District Court scale for the claim in these proceedings. Having regard to the entire evidence and the approach taken by the plaintiff throughout the trial of the proceedings, the Court makes the following orders:-
(1) An order directing the defendant to pay to the Plaintiff €13,262.50
(2) An order directing the defendant to pay the costs of the plaintiff on the District Court scale with a certificate for senior counsel up to and including the expiry of the reasonable period for the plaintiff to accept the Calderbank letter, which was 6 January 2023. For the purposes of this ruling and the other ruling and judgment, the Court refers particularly in regard, to s. 169(1)(f) of the Legal Services Regulation Act, 2015.
(3) An order directing the plaintiff to pay to the defendant the differential costs, having commenced and prosecuted his claim in the High Court when the proceedings ought to have been prosecuted in the District Court.
(4) No payment of €13,262.50 to the plaintiff until all costs have been agreed on or adjudicated while the defendant is entitled to offset the award of damages and costs to the plaintiff against the costs awarded to the defendant.
Appearances:
Counsel for the plaintiff: Eoin Clifford SC, Seamus Roche SC and Kate O'Connell B.L.
Solicitor for the plaintiff: Cashell Solicitors.
Counsel for the defendants: Noel McCarthy SC and Grainne Berkery B.L.
Solicitor for the defendants: FBD Solicitors.