The High Court was told that the Minister for Education and the State will not seek costs, estimated at more than €1 million, of an unsuccessful legal action by the parents of a boy with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Richard and Anne Clare had claimed the State had failed over years to provide early and appropriate education for their son Richard, now 18, but that claim was dismissed by Mr Justice Smyth last July on all grounds.
During a hearing before Mr Justice Smyth yesterday to determine who should pay the costs of the 16-day action, Mr Paul O'Higgins SC, for the Minister and State, said the decision not to seek costs should "not be considered a precedent".
"Without wishing to set any rule, I would submit that, in the ordinary way, costs would follow the event [ the loser pays the costs]," Mr O'Higgins said. However, having regard to all the circumstances, the State defendants would not be seeking their costs.
Counsel for the South Eastern Health Board, which also successfully defended the case, said the board would not be applying for costs but it too would not like the case to be seen as a precedent. The findings of the court were "a very clear vindication" of the board's position that it had met the health needs of Richard Clare.
When the costs matter was mentioned before the same judge a week ago, Mr John O'Donnell SC, for the State, indicated it would be seeking costs. The case was then adjourned to yesterday when the State announced it was not pursuing the costs claim.
Mr Paul Sreenan SC, for the Clares, said there was no application for costs by his side. Mr Justice Smyth said if there was no application, there would be no order for costs. The absence of any order means each side will meet its own costs. While the State's are estimated to be more than €1 million, it is not clear what bill, if any, the Clares will have to pay.
Yesterday the judge said he was anxious to know how Richard had performed in the Leaving Certificate, which he had sat last June. Mr Sreenan said Richard had secured 360 points and was pursuing studies in the Waterford Institute of Technology.
Mr Justice Smyth said he was absolutely delighted. He had heard evidence from experts called by Richard's side during the case to the effect that the boy was at risk of failing his Leaving Certificate. It was clear he had benefited from good teaching, the judge said.
Mr Sreenan said the Clares were even more delighted at the progress their son had made.
Afterwards Mr and Mrs Clare said they would not comment on the decision on costs. A statement is expected to be issued later by the Minister for Education.
The case ran for 16 days in the High Court and spanned a period from late 2003 to July 2004. It was initiated by Mr and Mrs Clare in 2000 but when their son turned 18 during the proceedings, the title was amended to reflect that he was the plaintiff.