header-logo header-logo

Costs—Security for costs—Jurisdiction

15 September 2011
Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court , CPR
printer mail-detail

Ackerman v Ackerman and others [2011] EWHC 2183 (Ch), [2011] All ER (D) 62 (Aug)

Chancery Division, Roth J, 12 Aug 2011

The Chancery Division has reviewed the principles applicable to security for costs.

Mr C Orr QC (instructed by Enyo Law LLP) for the Claimant.
Mr J Wardell QC and Ms E Murphy (instructed by Berwin Leighton Paisner LLP) for the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants. 3rd Defendant was not present and was not represented.

The proceedings concerned essentially a dispute between family members. The first defendant was the widow of the claimant’s brother. The claimant and his brother had built up a very successful business of property investment and development. After relations deteriorated T, a tax barrister, had been engaged to give effect to a division of the group of companies so as to achieve a demerger of their interests. The claimant took exception to T’s report and brought proceedings against the first defendant, her son, a new company (the first to third defendants) and T, alleging a series of breaches

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll