header-logo header-logo

Costs

04 November 2010
Issue: 7440 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Dumrul v Standard Chartered Bank [2010] EWHC 2625 (Comm), [2010] All ER (D) 216 (Oct)

It was settled law that the court would generally not exercise its discretion under CPR 25 to make an order for security of the costs of a claim if the same issues arose on the claim and counterclaim and the costs incurred in defending that claim would also be incurred in prosecuting the counterclaim.
There were two exceptions: (i) where the claim raised substantial factual inquiries which were not the subject of the counterclaim, an order for security might be appropriate notwistanding the fact that the claim provided a defence to the counterclaim; in which case an order for security would normally be limited to the costs of addressing additional issues raised only by the claim; and (ii) where the claim and counterclaim raised additional issues, it might also be relevant to consider whether the quantum of the claim in respect of which security was sought was substantially greater than the applicant’s claim. 
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll