Litigation
“Matheson’s disputes resolution team understand that disputes can be costly and disruptive, so they strive to resolve them efficiently and effectively, whether through negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or litigation. Their team has a proven track record of success in handling a wide range of complex disputes, including commercial litigation, construction disputes, intellectual property disputes, and regulatory investigations.”
Dispute Resolution: The European Legal 500 2025
Consultation on Consumer Protection, Competition and Enforcement
The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment has opened a public consulation on proposed reforms to strengthen Irish consumer protection, competition and enforcement. The proposals include granting the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (“CCPC”) powers to impose financial sanctions on businesses for consumer law breaches and enabling the CCPC to access and process public procurement data to detect potential bid-rigging, alongside potential legislative changes to strengthen consumer rights and remedies. The consultation invites submissions from individuals, businesses and consumer groups until 27 February 2026. Further information is available here, with additional discussion in our Matheson Insight: “Public consultation on proposed changes to Irish competition and consumer legislation”.
Proposed Reform of Non-Court Adjudicative Bodies
The Law Reform Commission has published a detailed consultation paper proposing reforms to standardise and simplify procedures of non-court adjudicative bodies (the “Consultation Paper”), with responses requested by 23 June 2026. Bodies within scope include Coimisiún na Meán, the Data Protection Commission and the CCPC. The Consultation Paper examines procedural requirements, powers, composition and judicial oversight of such bodies, setting out various reform options. The full Consultation Paper is available here and the executive summary here.
Civil Procedure – Recent Developments
Civil Reform Bill - the General Scheme of the Civil Reform Bill was published on 6 January 2026 (see the Government press release here). It implements, and in some cases expands upon, many recommendations from the Review of the Administration of Civil Justice Report, as well as supporting the Government’s Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan. Listed for priority drafting in the Government’s Spring Legislative Programme, the proposed legislation provides for significant changes to Irish civil litigation procedure that will transform how litigation is conducted in Ireland. For further discussion, see our Matheson Insight: “Impending change to how civil litigation is conducted in Ireland”.
Strike Out for Delay - the Supreme Court decision in Kirwan v Connors [2025] IESC 21 refined and simplified the test for striking out proceedings for want of prosecution / delay in prosecution. Our Matheson Insight “Strike out for delay: impact of the Supreme Court decision in Kirwan”, examines how this procedural change has been applied in subsequent High Court cases.
Litigation Funding – Recent Developments
The UK Government announced plans in December 2025 to legislate to mitigate the effect of the UK Supreme Court decision in PACCAR, which created significant uncertainty regarding the validity of many UK litigation funding agreements, and to create a regulatory framework for such agreements. Conversely the EU Commission concluded in November 2025 that no EU-wide regulation of third-party litigation funding is currently necessary, putting plans for new legislation on hold. Both developments are examined in our Matheson Insight: “Third-party litigation funding – recent developments in the UK and EU”.
Cross-Border Proceedings
Recognition of Judgments Under Brussels Recast - in November 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a second judgment in the Scully v Coucal litigation (discussed in our May and June 2025 updates), rejecting an additional argument that recognition and enforcement of a Polish judgment should be refused in Ireland under the public policy exception in the Brussels Recast Regulation. This highlights that EU Member State courts will only refuse to recognise judgments of other EU Member State courts in exceptional circumstances. See our Matheson Insight: “Supreme Court upholds recognition of EU judgment in Ireland” for further discussion.
Service Out of the Jurisdiction - two significant judgments were delivered by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal in December 2025 concerning multi-defendant cross-border litigation:
- Power v Telia Company AB & Ors [2025] IESC 55 - the Supreme Court clarified that in “mixed defendant cases” (involving multiple jurisdictions within and outside of the EU / Lugano Contracting States), leave to serve out of the jurisdiction is only required for non-EU / Lugano defendants, reversing the Court of Appeal’s position. The court also confirmed that renewal of a lapsed summons under Order 8, rule 1 (4) of the Rules of the Superior Courts (“RSC”) requires a single assessment of “special circumstances”, with legal advisors’ inadvertence or inattention unlikely to suffice.
- Trafalgar Developments Limited & Ors v. Mazepin & Ors [2025] IECA 280 - the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court, concluding Irish courts should not assume jurisdiction over non-EU defendants under Order 11 RSC where a matter is “overwhelmingly” foreign. Russia was found to be the clearly appropriate forum. Regarding Article 8(1) of the Brussels Recast Regulation, the court found no close connection between claims against an Irish anchor defendant and a Cypriot defendant, with the Irish defendant found to be a “mere device” to establish jurisdiction. Service on both the Russian and Cypriot defendants was set aside.
