S v Minister for Education; M v Minister for Education (Approved)

1.������ This judgment deals with two applications for a protective costs order providing that, regardless of the outcome of the substantive proceedings and any and all reliefs sought therein, the Minister shall bear all her own costs.

2.������ The substantive proceedings concern the Minister�s decision to refuse to enrol the applicants for a further year in school and for various declaratory reliefs that the Minister�s procedures and rules for determining whether a young person such as the applicants be granted a further year of education are unlawful and/or unconstitutional.

3.������ Mr. M is a 19-year-old man with autism spectrum disorder, global developmental delay and epilepsy. Mr. S is a 19-year-old man with autism spectrum disorder, an intellectual disability, and a congenital birth anomaly, cystic hygroma. Both applicants had applied for a further year in special school in order to make up for what they say is a significant amount of school time which they missed out on due to covid restrictions during the school year 2020/21, leaving them without the essential skills required to transition to an adult day service.

6.������ The applicants rely on case law (including Village Residents Association Ltd v An Bord Plean�la [2000] 4 IR 321 , R v Lord Chancellor ex p. CPAG [1998] 2 All ER 755 , and Rosborough v Cork County Council [2008] 4 IR 572 ), Order 99 of the Rules of the Superior Courts and s.168 and s.169 of the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 in submitting that the court enjoys a discretion in any application for costs and that a costs order may be made at any time.

7.������ The applicants assert that the proceedings are of general public importance and that they no longer have any private interest in them. The applicants have no means and their parents have only modest means whereas the Minister has superior financial capacity to bear costs. The applicants will discontinue proceedings if the order is not made.�