Tamiz v Offley & Anor [2022] EWHC 305 (QB) (15 February 2022)

Tamiz v Offley & Anor [2022] EWHC 305 (QB) (15 February 2022)

The Defendant was a nominal claimant acting for the benefit of others, with no direct interest in the counterclaim, and there was reason to believe she would be unable to pay the Claimants’ costs if ordered. The Judge below applied the correct principles and made findings of fact that were justified and not perverse. The appeal fails on all grounds.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 305
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Sohila Tamiz; Respondent/claimant: Anthony Offley; Respondent/claimant: The Green Bee Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Case Management Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Nominal Claimant, Agency, Impecuniosity, Case Management Appeals
Civil Procedure Contract Law Security for Costs Nominal Claimant Agency Impecuniosity Case Management Appeals

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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sohila Tamiz

Appellant/defendant

Anthony Offley

Respondent/claimant

The Green Bee Ltd

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Case Management Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant is a nominal claimant for the purposes of CPR 25.13(2)(f)
  2. 2 Whether there is reason to believe the Defendant will be unable to pay the Claimants’ costs if ordered to do so
  3. 3 Whether the Judge below erred in ordering security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was a nominal claimant acting for the benefit of others, with no direct interest in the counterclaim, and there was reason to believe she would be unable to pay the Claimants’ costs if ordered. The Judge below applied the correct principles and made findings of fact that were justified and not perverse. The appeal fails on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Stay of HHJ Roberts' order lifted forthwith
  • Extension of time for payments under HHJ Roberts' order