Sarpd Oil International Ltd v Addax Energy S.A. & Anor

Sarpd Oil International Ltd v Addax Energy S.A. & Anor

The evidence did not establish reason to believe that Sarpd would be unable to pay Addax's costs if ordered to do so, so CPR25.13(2)(c) was not satisfied and the application for security for costs was refused.

Parties
Claimant: Sarpd Oil International Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Addax Energy S.A.; Part 20 Defendant: Glencore Energy UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim With Part 20 Proceedings / Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs refused
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Costs Management, Third Party Proceedings
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Costs Management Third Party Proceedings

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sarpd Oil International Limited

Claimant

Addax Energy S.A.

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Glencore Energy UK Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim With Part 20 Proceedings / Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CPR25.13(2)(c) condition for security for costs is satisfied
  2. 2 Whether security can cover costs of Part 20 claim against third party
  3. 3 Whether security can cover defendant's potential liability for third party's costs

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish reason to believe that Sarpd would be unable to pay Addax's costs if ordered to do so, so CPR25.13(2)(c) was not satisfied and the application for security for costs was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs refused