High Court costs versus Circuit Court costs?

summereire

I know this is a 'how long is a piece of string' question but roughly how much more is a High Court action than a Circuit Court for the same matter? I.E. the same, 1.5, twice etc.

Any estimates, or pointers to any data on this, is much appreciated.

CIARAN_BOYLE

summereire wrote: »

I know this is a 'how long is a piece of string' question but roughly how much more is a High Court action than a Circuit Court for the same matter? I.E. the same, 1.5, twice etc.

Any estimates, or pointers to any data on this, is much appreciated.

Its very much a how long is a piece of string and how lucky you are and how much your solicitor wants you screwed

A barrister will probably charge more per hour to do a case in the hight court rather than the circuit court and you will probably have multiple barristers rather than one.

I'd say anything between twice as much and twenty times as much depending on the case and the solicitors in question

valleyoftheunos

Best to just say A LOT more and leave it at that, there is no rule of thumb.

Pat Mustard

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Its very much a how long is a piece of string and how lucky you are and how much your solicitor wants you screwed

Rubbish.

Procrastastudy

Maybe relevant to the OP and a question I'm curious about; if a case is appealed and won by the other side (applicant) who pays the fees? Does any fees order from the initial case get varied?

Are Circuit Court to High Court appeals de novo? (I'm aware I really should know the answer to that!)

If a decision is appealed to the Supreme Court do the costs take an order of magnitude jump like they do from the CC to HC?

summereire

Thanks for those responses, very string-life from what I'm hearing!

Yes, I'm also interested in the question above- in particular as regards a claim for an amount that falls over the threshold of what the Circuit Court is able to award so is therefore in the High Court's jurisdiction.

The trouble in this scenario seems to be that if a Plaintiff win's a case, but gets a few grand under what they were asking for, then the Defendant can challenge that it should have gone before the Circuit Court and demand the costs for the difference (which could be huge) but of course this was not to be known by the Plaintiff.

How does this work in practice? Do people just go to the Circuit Court and forget about the additional money they are entitled to because High Court costs are prohibitive or are there any systems in place to address this issue?

NoQuarter

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Maybe relevant to the OP and a question I'm curious about; if a case is appealed and won by the other side (applicant) who pays the fees? Does any fees order from the initial case get varied?

Are Circuit Court to High Court appeals de novo? (I'm aware I really should know the answer to that!)

If a decision is appealed to the Supreme Court do the costs take an order of magnitude jump like they do from the CC to HC?

The CC trial fees should be paid. The HC trial is a different trial and will have its own fees.

CC appeal to HC is de novo.

And yes, the SC costs are higher but bear in mind, SC appeals arent de novo and are "point of law" only so the issues would be net. Accordingly, the SC case would be a lot shorter that its HC case.

summereire wrote: »

Thanks for those responses, very string-life from what I'm hearing!

Yes, I'm also interested in the question above- in particular as regards a claim for an amount that falls over the threshold of what the Circuit Court is able to award so is therefore in the High Court's jurisdiction.

The trouble in this scenario seems to be that if a Plaintiff win's a case, but gets a few grand under what they were asking for, then the Defendant can challenge that it should have gone before the Circuit Court and demand the costs for the difference (which could be huge) but of course this was not to be known by the Plaintiff.

How does this work in practice? Do people just go to the Circuit Court and forget about the additional money they are entitled to because High Court costs are prohibitive or are there any systems in place to address this issue?

This is a different question that the ones asked above.

Practitioners are careful to correctly choose which court to initiate proceedings in. If, before the trial, it becomes obvious that the damages are more of less than originally thought, the case can be transferred with no penalty.

If, however, you are in the HC claiming 50k and you are awarded only 20k, you will get CC costs as if you were in the CC but you are liable to pay the excess costs that were ran up in the HC.

So choose wisely!

summereire

NoQuarter wrote: »

If, however, you are in the HC claiming 50k and you are awarded only 20k, you will get CC costs as if you were in the CC but you are liable to pay the excess costs that were ran up in the HC.

In the above scenario do you also need to pay the difference in costs between the CC and HC for the other side or just your own costs?

NoQuarter

summereire wrote: »

In the above scenario do you also need to pay the difference in costs between the CC and HC for the other side or just your own costs?

If a plaintiff wins in the HC but is awarded a figure under 38 odd k and therefore CC money, they have to pay all the HC fees over the CC fees. The defendant, being the loser of the case, will have to pay the CC fees for both sides.

summereire

What role does the taxing master have in this? Are they only involved if someone appeals the costs, or do they get involved in every case?

NoQuarter

summereire wrote: »

What role does the taxing master have in this? Are they only involved if someone appeals the costs, or do they get involved in every case?

Taxing master is usually only involved if the parties cant agree on the costs.

Have a little read here: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/court_offices/office_of_the_taxing_master.html