Legal News

Security for costs—payment into court where first claimant faced bankruptcy (Frank Schrijver UK Ltd and another v SmartDry)

Published on: 06 December 2019
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Security for costs—payment into court where first claimant faced bankruptcy (Frank Schrijver UK Ltd and another v SmartDry)
  • What are the practical implications of this case?
  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Was the requirement in CPR 25.13 (c) met?
  • Was it just to make the order?
  • Form of security for costs
  • Case details

Article summary

Dispute Resolution analysis: The first and third defendants successfully obtained an order for security for costs by way of a payment into court. The first claimant, a company, had limited cash and assets, and therefore there was reason to believe that it would be unable to pay the defendants’ costs if ordered to do so. The second claimant, an individual and Managing Director of the first claimant, was said to have £500,000 in cash and property. Deputy Master Henderson was concerned that the second claimant’s cash could be partly or entirely depleted by the time the trial concluded and there was insufficient information regarding the equity or ownership of the properties. He therefore concluded that it was appropriate to make an order for security for costs by way of payments into court. Written by Nicholas Lee, Managing Director and senior costs lawyer at Paragon Costs Solutions. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents