Taxpayer ‘should not have to pay costs’

IBRC has argued that the taxpayer should not have to pay the costs of Paddy McKillen’s legal action aimed at preventing his loans being sold by the IBRC special liquidators to the Barclay brothers.

Mr McKillen had brought High Court proceedings against both the special liquidators of the IBRC and David and Frederick Barclay, the billionaire brothers whom the property investor has been engaged in a long running battle with for control of the world-famous Claridge’s, Connaught and Berkeley hotels in London.

However, the case did not proceed after the Belfast born developer successfully acquired the loans, worth an estimated hundreds of millions of euro, with the backing of private international investment firm, Colony Capital.

Yesterday the matter returned before the High Court to deal with the issue of the legal costs of the case.

Michael Cush, counsel for Mr McKillen, said that while his client believed that he would have succeeded at a full hearing of the case, the proceedings had been rendered moot by the fact that the loans had been acquired.

Counsel said as a result, the court should not make any orders in respect of the legal costs as against the special liquidators of IBRC, who counsel added, “no wrong was ever alleged against” by Mr McKillen in his proceedings.

Counsel also told the court that it had been agreed between Mr McKillen and the Barclay brothers that they would each pay their own costs in respect of the proceedings between them.

Mr McKillen, counsel said, had already substantial costs in a number of pre-trial motions.

Lawyers for IBRC argued that its legal costs should be paid by Mr McKillen.

Cian Ferriter, counsel for the special liquidators of IBRC, said that his client was “caught in the crossfire of two warring parties.”

While it was accepted his client’s participation had been minimal, he did not see why IBRC which “is in effect the taxpayer”, should incur any legal costs.

The application for costs was made before Mr Justice Paul Gilligan.

Following the conclusion of submissions from the parties, Mr Justice Gilligan said he wished to give the matter some consideration.

The judge said he would rule on the matter today.