Implications of having a cost order against you?

Monife

Hi all,

Myself and my partner took high court judicial review proceedings against XXX and due to a recent negative judgement (similar to our own) we have been advised to withdraw our proceedings before they go to court.

The other side is refusing to let us withdraw it without cost implications and insist we accept a cost order against us.

We have no assets or savings, my partner lost his job last year and I am on a relatively low wage, so therefore would be unable to pay the cost order, which our own solicitors advise could be around €15,000 at this stage.

After much googling, I can't find anything.

Does anyone here know the implications of having a cost order against you? I know it affects your credit rating, so pretty much can't get a loan/mortgage, but are there any other implications and how long would it be against our name?

Really p*ssed off about it because we had no other choice but to go down this route and we still have a strong case but due to the recent judgement, our case is much more complicated and risky and could end up in the Supreme Court or European Court of Justice which could take over 4 years, you would think they would be happy to it just being withdrawn

Our man in Havana

They could get a judgement for the costs against you and enforce it as a normal judgement for a debt. So they could send the sheriff, stick a judgement mortgage on your house and then drag you into the district court for an instalment order to pay so much per week/month. If you default on that they may then seek to have you committed to prison.

Ultimately if you can't pay they will get nothing and waste their time and money trying.

Monife

Our man in Havana wrote: »

They could get a judgement for the costs against you and enforce it as a normal judgement for a debt. So they could send the sheriff, stick a judgement mortgage on your house and then drag you into the district court for an instalment order to pay so much per week/month. If you default on that they may then seek to have you committed to prison.

Ultimately if you can't pay they will get nothing and waste their time and money trying.

Thanks for that. Yeah we rent and have no savings. Only asset is my car and I suppose small tv and laptop (but don't know if you would call these assets, wouldn't get much for them).

Our solicitor said that it is unlikely that they will pursue a judgement for the order of costs, as you said which she also told us, they would be wasting their time and money and end up with nothing.

But what I am wondering is, if they don't get a judgement, what are the implications of having the cost order against our name? And how long would it be in effect for?

Thanks.

Our man in Havana

There would be no implications until they seek to enforce it.

Monife

Our man in Havana wrote: »

There would be no implications until they seek to enforce it.

Oh, ok thanks, I didn't know that. Sorry to bombard you but just one last question, if they do go to the bother of getting it enforced but they still can't retrieve their money from us as we don't have it, how long would that be against our name and credit rating?

Thanks a mil for your help.

FreudianSlippers

Monife wrote: »

which our own solicitors advise could be around €15,000 at this stage.

Your solicitors should be attempting to negotiate this figure down and should be dealing with you to get their costs down. Don't forget you'll have to pay you solicitor too.

Does anyone here know the implications of having a cost order against you? I know it affects your credit rating, so pretty much can't get a loan/mortgage, but are there any other implications and how long would it be against our name?

The Order for Costs itself doesn't have any impact on your credit (AFAIK), that situation would be manifestly different where they sought to enforce that order if you don't pay (sounding from your post like when you don't pay).

At the end of the day you took a case and, effectively, lost. You are now responsible for the implications of that, which means paying your solicitor's fees and the other side's as well. I'm frankly disgusted by the number of people who think that the legal profession is some group of idiots who love to do work for free.
Would you take a taxi and then expect not to pay at the end?

blueythebear

Monife wrote: »

Hi all,

Myself and my partner took high court judicial review proceedings against XXX and due to a recent negative judgement (similar to our own) we have been advised to withdraw our proceedings before they go to court.

The other side is refusing to let us withdraw it without cost implications and insist we accept a cost order against us.

We have no assets or savings, my partner lost his job last year and I am on a relatively low wage, so therefore would be unable to pay the cost order, which our own solicitors advise could be around €15,000 at this stage.

After much googling, I can't find anything.

Does anyone here know the implications of having a cost order against you? I know it affects your credit rating, so pretty much can't get a loan/mortgage, but are there any other implications and how long would it be against our name?

Really p*ssed off about it because we had no other choice but to go down this route and we still have a strong case but due to the recent judgement, our case is much more complicated and risky and could end up in the Supreme Court or European Court of Justice which could take over 4 years, you would think they would be happy to it just being withdrawn

Would the "recent negative judgement" be one from the ECJ on free movement within the EU? If this is so, I'd be surprised that the State would take the view that they wouldn't beaer their own costs.

Regardless of what the case is about, there is no sense in the other side pursuing costs if you cannot pay. However, it is likely that the other side wish to get a costs order against you to deter you from withdrawing your current proceedings and perhaps reformulating them in the light of this "recent negative judgement".

As has already been said, there is no effect to having a costs order against you until steps have been taken to enforce it. For example, for it to affect your credit rating, it would have to be registered and published first. To do this, there would have to be separate proceedings taken by the other side in order for them to obtain judgement against you and you would have to receive a warning letter to this effect prior to this.

Monife

blueythebear wrote: »

Would the "recent negative judgement" be one from the ECJ on free movement within the EU? If this is so, I'd be surprised that the State would take the view that they wouldn't beaer their own costs.

Regardless of what the case is about, there is no sense in the other side pursuing costs if you cannot pay. However, it is likely that the other side wish to get a costs order against you to deter you from withdrawing your current proceedings and perhaps reformulating them in the light of this "recent negative judgement".

As has already been said, there is no effect to having a costs order against you until steps have been taken to enforce it. For example, for it to affect your credit rating, it would have to be registered and published first. To do this, there would have to be separate proceedings taken by the other side in order for them to obtain judgement against you and you would have to receive a warning letter to this effect prior to this.

Thanks for that.

Yes it was the McCarthy case regarding free movement. While our case is similar to hers (in the fact that I have British citizenship and have never left Ireland and also Irish citizenship and hers was the other way around) but she was on benefits, where as I am a worker, and the Department also issued me with a permanent residence certificate (which I applied for) certifying that they do recognise me as a British citizen living in Ireland with the right of permanent residence.

The above and also the recent Zambrano judgement, is the reason our case is still strong but because it is such a new and complex area of law, our barrister thinks our case will most definitely merit a reference to the ECJ and end up going through the Supreme court, therefore taking years so this is why we wish to withdraw the proceedings.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Your solicitors should be attempting to negotiate this figure down and should be dealing with you to get their costs down. Don't forget you'll have to pay you solicitor too.

No we don't, our solicitor and barristers are/were doing it "No win No fee," we just had to pay a "small" amount towards the running of the case.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

At the end of the day you took a case and, effectively, lost. You are now responsible for the implications of that, which means paying your solicitor's fees and the other side's as well. I'm frankly disgusted by the number of people who think that the legal profession is some group of idiots who love to do work for free.
Would you take a taxi and then expect not to pay at the end?

I do not think solicitors are a group of idiots who should work for free. As I said, our solicitors were interested in our case and we so confident in it (prior to the McCarthy judgement) that they did not require us to pay for their fees. As for the other sides costs, I think it is a bit unjust to ask us to pay their costs as we had no other choice but to bring these judicial review proceedings against them (they would not offer us the option of an internal review) and not much work would have been done as we gave them notice of intention to withdraw prior to the drawing up of legal submissions.

Our man in Havana

They can't stop you from withdrawing the case and you do not have to consent to a costs order. They can seek a costs order and it would be up to the court whether to grant one or not.

Monife

Our man in Havana wrote: »

They can't stop you from withdrawing the case and you do not have to consent to a costs order. They can seek a costs order and it would be up to the court whether to grant one or not.

I did not know this at all, thank you for that. Our barrister said that we have to accept a cost order against us to withdraw the proceedings, must get onto my solicitor.

blueythebear

Monife wrote: »

Thanks for that.

Yes it was the McCarthy case regarding free movement. While our case is similar to hers (in the fact that I have British citizenship and have never left Ireland and also Irish citizenship and hers was the other way around) but she was on benefits, where as I am a worker, and the Department also issued me with a permanent residence certificate (which I applied for) certifying that they do recognise me as a British citizen living in Ireland with the right of permanent residence.

The above and also the recent Zambrano judgement, is the reason our case is still strong but because it is such a new and complex area of law, our barrister thinks our case will most definitely merit a reference to the ECJ and end up going through the Supreme court, therefore taking years so this is why we wish to withdraw the proceedings.

I realise that time is a factor but I presume you took proceedings on account of it being your last resort. It may not take as long as you think. If time is of the essence in your case, you could always request the accelarated Article 234 procedure and it would be likely to go straight to the ECJ from the High Court rather than having to go to the Supreme Court. It could take less than a year in fact if it goes to HC and goes straight to the ECJ under accelarated 234 procedure. There would be no Supreme Court involved in that case.

Monife

blueythebear wrote: »

I realise that time is a factor but I presume you took proceedings on account of it being your last resort. It may not take as long as you think. If time is of the essence in your case, you could always request the accelarated Article 234 procedure and it would be likely to go straight to the ECJ from the High Court rather than having to go to the Supreme Court. It could take less than a year in fact if it goes to HC and goes straight to the ECJ under accelarated 234 procedure. There would be no Supreme Court involved in that case.

Is it easy to be granted the accelerated procedure? Again, another thing we were not notified of

Anyway, it is too late now Legal submissions were supposed to be completed over 2 weeks ago and hearing date was this thursday, 26th May.

bath handle

Our man in Havana wrote: »

They can't stop you from withdrawing the case and you do not have to consent to a costs order. They can seek a costs order and it would be up to the court whether to grant one or not.

If a plaintiff withdraws proceedings the defendant is automatically entitled to costs. Sotimes defendants waive their right to costs in order to encourage the plaintiff to drop the claim and bring finality to the matter.

blueythebear

Monife wrote: »

Is it easy to be granted the accelerated procedure? Again, another thing we were not notified of

Anyway, it is too late now Legal submissions were supposed to be completed over 2 weeks ago and hearing date was this thursday, 26th May.

You would have to request it of the Judge making the reference and I believe there are guidelines for whether an accelarated reference is to be granted but I believe that in general, the individual concerned has to be in prison on account of the law being challenged. However, the Metock case was one that had the accelarated procedure applied to it but I'm not sure of the reasons why (there was no imprisonment nor threat of same as far as I'm aware). Apparently that case was dealt with within 4 months! (See http://www.legalaidboard.ie/lab/publishing.nsf/content/The_Researcher_March_2009_Article_4)

You could always request more time from the Judge dealing with it if you wanted to proceed. I'd suggest discussing the matter with your solicitor before this obviously but you're not too late yet.

Tom Young

Monife - You need legal advice. I am sorry. The forum charter is as it is. The matters you face are significant. Do not rely on anything here. Although in saying that, we have some sensible posters on this particular thread.

I won't close this thread, but do not face down the barrel of a gun without taking advice.