Judge did not err in reducing costs awarded to successful party in copyright dispute

Costs – appeal of costs order – non-infringing internet service provider – order or injunction pursuant to s. 40(5A) of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 (as inserted by Article 2 of the European Union (Copyright and Related Rights) Regulation 2012 (S.I. No. 59 of 2012) – Article 8(3) of Directive 2001/29/EC – High Court made orders that the plaintiffs should recover 60% of their costs up to the date of the substantive judgment in the High Court – whether the trial judge failed to take into account the special circumstances of the case which they submit justifies no order for costs in favour of the plaintiffs notwithstanding the injunction granted – appellate jurisdiction – Ord. 99, r. 1(1) – trial judge did not err in his approach of treating these proceedings as adversarial proceedings between the plaintiffs and UPC and not departing from the approach that costs should follow the event – trial judge did not err in his approach in reducing the costs awarded to the plaintiffs as the successful party on the main issue in the proceedings by reason of the fact that UPC had succeeded on certain issues – appeal and cross appeal dismissed – costs of the appeal awarded to plaintiff on a party and party basis