Heifer International Ltd v Christiansen & Anor [2013] EWHC 721 (TCC) (09 April 2013)

Heifer International Ltd v Christiansen & Anor [2013] EWHC 721 (TCC) (09 April 2013)

The court found that the £45,000 costs order remains unpaid, there was no evidence of payment from the Danish accounts, and the Danish arbitration did not find an economic loss to Heifer from the disputed payment. Therefore, there was no basis to discharge the charging order.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 721 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Heifer International Limited; First Defendant: Helge Christiansen; Second Defendant: Christiansen Arkitekter KS MAA PAR
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Application in Civil Proceedings (charging Order) / Post Judgment, Application to Discharge Charging Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Charging Orders, Enforcement of Costs Orders, Breach of Trust, Foreign Arbitration Awards, Discharge of Security
Civil Procedure Trusts and Equity Construction Law Charging Orders Enforcement of Costs Orders Breach of Trust Foreign Arbitration Awards Discharge of Security

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Heifer International Limited

Claimant

Helge Christiansen

First Defendant

Christiansen Arkitekter KS MAA PAR

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application in Civil Proceedings (charging Order) / Post Judgment, Application to Discharge Charging Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charging order over the Claimant's property should be discharged
  2. 2 Whether the underlying debt (costs order) has been discharged or remains outstanding
  3. 3 Whether the August 2007 payment by Mr Christiansen was a breach of trust and its effect on the costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the £45,000 costs order remains unpaid, there was no evidence of payment from the Danish accounts, and the Danish arbitration did not find an economic loss to Heifer from the disputed payment. Therefore, there was no basis to discharge the charging order.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's application to discharge the Final Charging Order is dismissed.
  • No order is made on the Defendants' application.