Court to rule next week on costs in ex-tenant’s case against Marc Godart | BreakingNews.ie

Luxembourg landlord Marc Godart has urged the court not to make him and his insolvent firm liable to pay the legal costs incurred by a former tenant in pursuing him for payment of a €15,433 Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) award.

Mr Justice Brian Cregan said there were complex legal issues at play so he would take a week to rule on the question of legal costs.

Ex-tenant Lizet Peña-Herrera brought a High Court application against Green Label Short Lets Ltd, the Godart firm that was ordered in 2022 to pay her the €15,433 compensation because she was unlawfully evicted from a house she was living in at Vintage Court, Cork Street, Dublin 8.

Mr Godart, Green Label’s sole director, said in an affidavit that the company was no longer trading and had no funds to pay the award. Ms Peña-Herrera secured an order requiring Mr Godart to come to court to explain the company’s financial affairs.

Following this, the court was told Green Label had secured a loan to pay her the amount owed.

Although her case was against Green Label only, Ms Peña-Herrera’s legal team wants the court to make it and Mr Godart liable to pay her legal costs.

He senior counsel, John Kennedy, submitted on Friday that it is “clear as day” that Mr Godart is the “real party” in the application. His client had to take risks coming to the High Court to get justice for being egregiously convicted, he said.

Mr Kennedy, instructed by McGrath Mullan, said Ms Peña-Herrera’s case was successful as it resulted in her securing the amount owed. The court must consider what is “just”, while the “bad faith” actions of Green Label and Mr Godart should also be looked at, he said.

Gary McCarthy SC, for the landlord side, asked for no costs order to be made against his clients.

He submitted that the case has been before the court 11 times and has been “unnecessarily prolonged”. He pointed to deficiencies in Ms Peña-Herrera’s application and said many of his grounds were upheld by the court.

Mr Justice Cregan remarked that the application was fought “tooth and nail” and then, once there was an order for Mr Godart to be questioned in court, there “suddenly” appeared a check for the full amount owed to the plaintiff.

Mr McCarthy, instructed by Shields Solicitors, noted the amount was borrowed. A company that does not have any funds cannot be said to be willfully disobeying a court order for payment.

The application for costs is due to be ruled upon next Thursday.