Substitution application denied and costs awarded to state in constitutional challenge

High Court refuses a substitution application by a plaintiff seeking to replace a company with himself in ongoing litigation, after the court had already delivered a judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' claims that certain legislative provisions were unconstitutional. The court also awarded costs to the State, rejecting the plaintiffs' contention that they should be awarded costs due to the exceptional nature of the case. The plaintiffs' applications for costs against a third party and for correction of an alleged error in the judgment were also denied. The court indicated that the State was entitled to costs for the substitution application and the costs applications, with a stay on execution pending appeal. The plaintiffs' motion to reopen the proceedings based on a recent CJEU decision was similarly rejected, as the court found no exceptional circumstances warranting such a reopening.