Costs orders, multiple claims and impecunious defendants (BTI v Sequana)

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Chancery Division considered the application of the general rule as to costs (CPR Rule 44.2) when making proportionate costs orders in proceedings involving multiple claims and failures and successes on both sides. The court also considered when it is appropriate to stay execution of a judgment given the impecuniosity of the unsuccessful party, whether and on what basis to order an interim payment of account against such a party and whether to order security for costs when an appeal is pending. This News Analysis is limited to the costs aspects of the judgment.