Shell UK Ltd v Advisory Business Services Plc & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 426 (26 March 2001)
Security for costs was ordered against the first defendant to protect the claimant's position, and the second and third defendants were entitled to their costs for attending to clarify the claimant's application.
- Citation
- [2001] EWCA Civ 426
- Parties
- Claimant/applicant: Shell UK Limited; First Defendant/respondent: Advisory Business Services PLC; Second Defendant/respondent: Peter Robert Southgate; Third Defendant/respondent: Philip Skorochod; Fourth Defendant/respondent: DA Philips & Co Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 March 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Security for Costs / Appeal From Central London County Court
- Outcome
- Application for security for costs granted; costs orders made as specified.
- Legal Topics
- Security for Costs, Costs Orders, Appeal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Shell UK Limited
Claimant/applicant
Advisory Business Services PLC
First Defendant/respondent
Peter Robert Southgate
Second Defendant/respondent
Philip Skorochod
Third Defendant/respondent
DA Philips & Co Ltd
Fourth Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs / Appeal From Central London County Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the first defendant
- 2 Entitlement to costs for parties attending to clarify the claimant's position
Ratio Decidendi
Security for costs was ordered against the first defendant to protect the claimant's position, and the second and third defendants were entitled to their costs for attending to clarify the claimant's application.
Court Disposition
Application for security for costs granted; costs orders made as specified.
Orders
- ABS substituted as first defendant in place of AB Advisory Business Services Plc.
- First defendant to pay £12,000 security for costs into court by 2nd April; failure results in stay of first defendant's appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment