header-logo header-logo

24 July 2013
Issue: 7570 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Costs

Northampton Regional Livestock Centre Company v Cowling and another [2013] EWHC 1720 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 168 (Jul)

It was settled law that, in considering whether an application for security was being used oppressively to stifle a genuine claim, the court had to be satisfied that, in all the circumstances, it was probable that the claim would be stifled. The court should consider, not only whether a claimant company could provide security out of its own resources to continue the litigation, but also whether it could raise the amount needed from outside sources, from, for example: directors, shareholders, or other backers or interested persons, including creditors. In all but the most unusual cases, the burden would lie on the claimant company to show that, apart from the question as to whether the company's own means were sufficient to meet an order for security, there would be no prospect of funds being available and forthcoming from any outside source.

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll