header-logo header-logo

Security for costs: sending & receiving

06 December 2024 / Avneet Baryan
Issue: 8097 / Categories: Features , Profession , Costs
printer mail-detail
200297
When is security deemed received—on payment or on receipt of cleared funds? Avneet Baryan examines the case law
  • The Court of Appeal has confirmed the importance of compliance with court orders for the effective administration of justice.
  • Payment by cheque for security for costs is deemed received once payment is received in cleared funds, not when payment is made.

The recent case of Parsdome Holdings Ltd v Plastic Energy Global SL [2024] EWCA Civ 1293 makes for an interesting read for commercial litigators, particularly regarding compliance with security for costs orders. While the case underscores the critical importance of adhering to court orders to avoid a sanction such as strike out, there is also an interesting story about when security for costs is deemed received by the Court Funds Office (CFO).

The claimant British Virgin Islands (BVI) company, Parsdome, brought proceedings against the defendant, Plastic Energy, alleging that Plastic Energy induced it to enter into a deed of novation of a convertible loan agreement by fraudulent misrepresentations.

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