Rajabieslami v Tariverdi & Ors [2023] EWHC 455 (Comm) (06 March 2023)

Rajabieslami v Tariverdi & Ors [2023] EWHC 455 (Comm) (06 March 2023)

Security for costs is ordered because the claimant is resident outside the jurisdiction, there is a real risk of substantial obstacles to enforcement of any costs order in Qatar, and the evidence as to assets in other jurisdictions is insufficiently reliable or secure to negate that risk. The merits of the underlying claim do not clearly and shortly demonstrate that the claimant is very likely to succeed, and there is no evidence that an order for security would stifle the claim.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 455 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Dr Morteza Rajabieslami; First Defendant: Mr Sam Tariverdi; Second Defendant: Melousa Inc; Third Defendant: Passa Navigation Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Freezing Injunctions, Trusts, Forgery Allegations
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Freezing Injunctions Trusts Forgery Allegations

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Morteza Rajabieslami

Claimant

Mr Sam Tariverdi

First Defendant

Melousa Inc

Second Defendant

Passa Navigation Inc

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to security for costs under CPR 25.13(2) against a claimant resident outside the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of substantial obstacles to enforcement of a costs order in Qatar or other jurisdictions
  3. 3 Whether the merits of the underlying claim justify refusing security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs is ordered because the claimant is resident outside the jurisdiction, there is a real risk of substantial obstacles to enforcement of any costs order in Qatar, and the evidence as to assets in other jurisdictions is insufficiently reliable or secure to negate that risk. The merits of the underlying claim do not clearly and shortly demonstrate that the claimant is very likely to succeed, and there is no evidence that an order for security would stifle the claim.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Claimant to provide security for the defendants' costs in the sum of USD 550,000 by payment into court or provision of a bank guarantee, within 28 days.