Apex Global Management Ltd & Anor v FI Call Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 779 (Ch) (19 March 2014)

Apex Global Management Ltd & Anor v FI Call Ltd & Ors [2014] EWHC 779 (Ch) (19 March 2014)

Given the existence of cross-petitions raising inseparable issues, and the risk of one-sided litigation, it is inappropriate to order security for costs against either party. Although the condition in CPR 25.13(2)(g) is satisfied as regards Apex and Mr Almhairat, the discretion should not be exercised to order security in the circumstances of this case.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 779 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/petitioner: Apex Global Management Limited; Claimant/petitioner: Faisal Abdel Hafiz Almhairat; Defendant/respondent: Fi Call Limited; Defendant/respondent: Global Torch Limited; Defendant/respondent: HRH Prince Abdulaziz bin Mishal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud; Defendant/respondent: Emad Mahmoud Ahmed Abu-Ayshih; Defendant/respondent: HRH Prince Mishal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Companies Court Proceedings Under Companies Act 2006, S.994 (unfair Prejudice Petitions) and Related Claims / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Both applications for security for costs dismissed.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Unfair Prejudice Petition, Cross Claims, Discretion Under CPR 25.13, Costs Orders
Company Law Civil Procedure Security for Costs Unfair Prejudice Petition Cross Claims Discretion Under CPR 25.13 Costs Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apex Global Management Limited

Claimant/petitioner

Faisal Abdel Hafiz Almhairat

Claimant/petitioner

Fi Call Limited

Defendant/respondent

Global Torch Limited

Defendant/respondent

HRH Prince Abdulaziz bin Mishal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

Defendant/respondent

Emad Mahmoud Ahmed Abu-Ayshih

Defendant/respondent

HRH Prince Mishal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Companies Court Proceedings Under Companies Act 2006, S.994 (unfair Prejudice Petitions) and Related Claims / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the Apex Parties (claimants/petitioners) and/or Global Parties (defendants/respondents) in the context of cross-petitions for unfair prejudice under s.994 Companies Act 2006.
  2. 2 Whether the conditions in CPR 25.13(2), particularly condition (g), are satisfied.
  3. 3 Whether the existence of cross-claims/cross-petitions precludes the making of a security for costs order.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the existence of cross-petitions raising inseparable issues, and the risk of one-sided litigation, it is inappropriate to order security for costs against either party. Although the condition in CPR 25.13(2)(g) is satisfied as regards Apex and Mr Almhairat, the discretion should not be exercised to order security in the circumstances of this case.

Court Disposition

Both applications for security for costs dismissed.

Orders

  • No order for security for costs against any party.