Dmitry Lazarichev & Ors v Tsimafei Lyndou

Dmitry Lazarichev & Ors v Tsimafei Lyndou

'Resident' in CPR r. 25.13(2)(a) bears its ordinary factual meaning and does not require lawfulness unless the statutory context or purpose demands it. The Master was entitled to find the claimant factually and lawfully resident in Poland, and was correct not to determine complex questions of foreign law or admit late expert evidence on an interim application. The wrongdoing principle does not preclude reliance on residence unless the statutory purpose so requires, which is not the case for security for costs.

Parties
Defendant/appellant: Dmitry Lazarichev; Defendant/appellant: Pavel Matveev; Defendant/appellant: Georgy Sokolov; Claimant/respondent: Tsimafei Lyndou
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orders on Security for Costs and Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Statutory Construction, Residence Requirement, Illegality and Public Policy
Civil Procedure Security for Costs Statutory Construction Residence Requirement Illegality and Public Policy

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

Parties

Dmitry Lazarichev

Defendant/appellant

Pavel Matveev

Defendant/appellant

Georgy Sokolov

Defendant/appellant

Tsimafei Lyndou

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Orders on Security for Costs and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'resident' in CPR r. 25.13(2)(a) means 'lawfully resident'
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was factually and lawfully resident in Poland for the purposes of resisting an order for security for costs
  3. 3 Whether the wrongdoing principle precludes reliance on residence obtained by alleged unlawful means

Ratio Decidendi

'Resident' in CPR r. 25.13(2)(a) bears its ordinary factual meaning and does not require lawfulness unless the statutory context or purpose demands it. The Master was entitled to find the claimant factually and lawfully resident in Poland, and was correct not to determine complex questions of foreign law or admit late expert evidence on an interim application. The wrongdoing principle does not preclude reliance on residence unless the statutory purpose so requires, which is not the case for security for costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; orders of Master Pester affirmed
  • Counsel to provide draft order for consideration