High Court, in judicial review proceedings, refuses to quash a decision of the Taxing Master effectively determining that the applicant and former solicitor of the notice party had overcharged his former client to the tune of some €70,000, on the grounds that because this is an instance of court ordered taxation of costs, which is ancillary to the plenary proceedings issued by the notice party, it is the High Court that is hearing those plenary proceedings, and not the High Court in judicial review, which is the appropriate forum in which this matter should be resolved.
Judicial review - taxation of legal costs - proceedings instituted by notice party against his former solicitor, the applicant - allegation of overcharging - applicant asked by court to provide account of monies in respect of notice party - order referring two bills of costs to taxation - whether a proper bill of costs ever furnished - whether evidence of a voluntary payment by client/notice party to applicant exists - finding by taxing master of €70,000 overcharged - whether master took into account five separate bills where bills of account had actually issued and which were voluntarily paid by notice party - whether certain bills taxed on a party and party basis should have been taxed on a solicitor client basis - mandamus - quo warranto - preliminary matter - inherent jurisdiction of High Court to refer bills of costs to taxation - court ordered taxation ancillary to plenary proceedings between parties - applicant's application to re-enter matter into High Court list refused and award of costs made against him - obiter comments - availability of an alternative remedy to judicial review - High Court which is hearing the plenary proceedings is the more appropriate venue to litigate issues regarding taxation since it is court-ordered - applicant's right to raise objections in writing to taxing master - review of taxing master's decision on appeal also possible - right of appeal in various forms outstanding at this juncture for applicant who has as yet failed to exercise same - court's discretion to refuse reliefs.