CNM Estates (Tolworth Tower) Ltd v VeCREF I Sarl & Ors [2018] EWHC 2838 (Comm) (19 October 2018)

CNM Estates (Tolworth Tower) Ltd v VeCREF I Sarl & Ors [2018] EWHC 2838 (Comm) (19 October 2018)

The court found this to be an absolutely plain case for security for costs, with the claimant's evidence insufficient to alter that view. Security was ordered for all defendants, with amounts and schedule determined based on incurred and anticipated costs, and case management directions given.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2838 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: CNM Estates (Tolworth Tower) Limited; First Defendant: Vecref I SARL; Second Defendant: Venn Partners LLP; Third Defendant: Simon Peter Carvill-Biggs; Fourth Defendant: Freddy Khalastch; Third Party: Knight Frank LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Claim / Security for Costs Application and Initial Case Management
Outcome
Security for costs ordered; case management directions given; summary assessment of costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Case Management, Summary Assessment of Costs
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Case Management Summary Assessment of Costs

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CNM Estates (Tolworth Tower) Limited

Claimant

Vecref I SARL

First Defendant

Venn Partners LLP

Second Defendant

Simon Peter Carvill-Biggs

Third Defendant

Freddy Khalastch

Fourth Defendant

Knight Frank LLP

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Claim / Security for Costs Application and Initial Case Management

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the claimant
  2. 2 Appropriate amount and schedule for security
  3. 3 Case management directions including amendments to pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

The court found this to be an absolutely plain case for security for costs, with the claimant's evidence insufficient to alter that view. Security was ordered for all defendants, with amounts and schedule determined based on incurred and anticipated costs, and case management directions given.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered; case management directions given; summary assessment of costs awarded.

Orders

  • Claimant to provide security for costs totaling £280,000 in specified instalments.
  • Draft amended particulars of claim to be served by 16 November 2018.