The Irish Supreme Court recently refined the legal test to be applied in security for costs applications against corporate plaintiffs. The Supreme Court introduced a new leg to the proper approach to such applications. In certain circumstances, the court must consider whether is it likely that the proceedings will be “stifled” by an order for security. This consideration should be taken into account in assessing the rights of the parties and the approach that will cause the least injustice to them.
In another recent development, the Supreme Court also confirmed that Irish security for costs law complies with EU law rights.
In this briefing we look at these developments in more detail and consider:
- The special circumstance of impecuniosity
- Quinn Insurance Limited (Under Administration) v PricewaterhouseCoopers IESC 15
- The new leg to the special circumstances test
- Public Interest considerations
- Protégé International Group (Cyprus) Ltd v Irish Distillers IESC 16
- EU law compatibility
Contributed by Joanne Ryan and Gail Nohilly
