Pablo Star Ltd v Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company

Pablo Star Ltd v Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company

The applications by EITC to set aside permission to appeal, to order security for costs, and to revoke the stay on the costs order below were refused because there was no evidence the court had been misled, the appellant had a good arguable case, and ordering security would stifle the appeal. The application regarding new evidence was deferred to the appeal court, with the observation that the Ladd v Marshall test would apply.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Pablo Star Limited; Respondent/claimant: Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Pending Appeal
Outcome
All applications refused
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Jurisdiction, Stay of Execution, Incorporation of Terms, Arbitration Clauses
Civil Procedure Contract Law Security for Costs Jurisdiction Stay of Execution Incorporation of Terms Arbitration Clauses

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pablo Star Limited

Appellant/defendant

Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be set aside under CPR 52.9
  2. 2 Whether security for costs should be ordered against the appellant
  3. 3 Whether the stay on payment of costs below should be revoked

Ratio Decidendi

The applications by EITC to set aside permission to appeal, to order security for costs, and to revoke the stay on the costs order below were refused because there was no evidence the court had been misled, the appellant had a good arguable case, and ordering security would stifle the appeal. The application regarding new evidence was deferred to the appeal court, with the observation that the Ladd v Marshall test would apply.

Court Disposition

All applications refused

Orders

  • Application to set aside permission to appeal refused
  • Application for security for costs refused