Conor McGregor has been ordered to pay the legal costs of Nikita Hand after a civil action case found that she had been raped by the mixed martial arts fighter in Dublin six years ago. The High Court judge ruled that McGregor will have to cover the full costs of his side of the case, while Hand will pay her own costs in relation to her case against another individual, James Lawrence, who she also sought damages from but lost the case against. The judge made the decision after considering McGregor’s defence, which relied on Lawrence’s version of events on the day of the incident. Hand was awarded nearly 250,000 euros (£207,000) in damages against McGregor after a three-week civil trial.
During the proceedings, it was revealed that McGregor had been covering the legal costs of Lawrence. Hand’s lawyer argued that McGregor should pay the entire costs of the proceedings due to his conduct before, during, and after the trial. McGregor had reportedly made social media posts criticizing the court as a “kangaroo court” after the verdict, which the judge found to be disrespectful to the jury. McGregor’s lawyer rejected the application for him to pay full costs, stating that costs should be awarded in the normal way based on the events.
The jury’s ruling against McGregor was highlighted by Hand’s legal team to argue that McGregor should cover all costs, as it demonstrated that the jury did not believe Lawrence. However, McGregor’s lawyer argued against this, stating that the court does not have wide discretion to award costs beyond what is normal procedure in such cases.
The judge expressed dissatisfaction with McGregor’s public criticism of the jury, calling it “most unsatisfactory” and emphasizing that such actions should not go unnoticed when considering costs. The case highlighted the complexities and sensitivities surrounding legal proceedings involving high-profile individuals and the importance of respecting the judicial process.
In conclusion, this case sheds light on the implications of public behaviour and statements made by individuals involved in legal disputes, especially those with significant influence and following. It underscores the need for all parties to conduct themselves with respect and integrity throughout legal proceedings, and the potential repercussions of failing to do so.