Conor McGregor ordered to pay Nikita Hand’s legal costs after civil action case

Conor McGregor has been ordered to pay Nikita Hand’s legal costs following a civil action case where she was awarded nearly 250,000 euros (£207,000) in damages against the mixed martial arts fighter. This ruling came after a three-week civil trial in Dublin, during which a jury found that Ms Hand had been raped by McGregor six years ago. The High Court judge also ruled that James Lawrence, from whom she sought damages for assault but lost, cannot claim his costs against her.

The costs were determined on a party-party basis, meaning Ms Hand will cover her own costs related to Mr Lawrence, while McGregor will be responsible for the full costs of his side of the case. Justice Alex Owens made this decision in response to McGregor’s defence, which relied on Mr Lawrence’s account of the incident. McGregor had been paying the legal costs of his friend throughout the case. The court took into consideration McGregor’s conduct before, during, and after the trial, including social media posts where he criticized the court as a “kangaroo court,” which was deemed a direct insult to the jury.

Ms Hand’s lawyer, John Gordon SC, argued that McGregor should bear the entire costs of the proceedings due to his behaviour. On the other hand, Remy Farrell SC, representing McGregor, rejected the application, stating that costs should be decided in the normal way based on the event. John Fitzgerald SC, for Mr Lawrence, emphasized that his client was not part of any conspiracy against Ms Hand and cautioned against the court becoming the 13th juror in the case.

In summary, Conor McGregor has been instructed to cover Nikita Hand’s legal costs after she was granted damages in a civil action case against him. The judge’s decision was influenced by McGregor’s conduct throughout the trial, including his derogatory comments towards the court and jury. This ruling highlights the importance of respectful behaviour in legal proceedings and the consequences of disparaging remarks towards the judicial process.