CIBC Mellon Trust Company & Ors v Stolzenberg & Ors [2004] EWCA Civ 117 (13 February 2004)

CIBC Mellon Trust Company & Ors v Stolzenberg & Ors [2004] EWCA Civ 117 (13 February 2004)

Given the Defendants' persistent and deliberate non-compliance with court orders, the risk of non-recovery of costs, and the fact that the litigation is funded by a wealthy third party outside the jurisdiction, there are compelling reasons to impose conditions on permission to appeal and to order security for costs. The sums ordered are proportionate to the estimated costs and the circumstances of the case.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 117
Parties
Claimant/appellant: CIBC Mellon Trust Company & Ors; Respondent/defendant: Stolzenberg & Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Security for Costs and Conditions on Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Conditions on Appeal, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Third Party Funding, Freezing Orders
Civil Procedure Costs Security for Costs Conditions on Appeal Non Compliance With Court Orders Third Party Funding Freezing Orders

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CIBC Mellon Trust Company & Ors

Claimant/appellant

Stolzenberg & Ors

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Security for Costs and Conditions on Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs and conditions should be imposed on permission to appeal
  2. 2 Quantum of security for costs
  3. 3 Whether past costs should be ordered as a condition of appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Given the Defendants' persistent and deliberate non-compliance with court orders, the risk of non-recovery of costs, and the fact that the litigation is funded by a wealthy third party outside the jurisdiction, there are compelling reasons to impose conditions on permission to appeal and to order security for costs. The sums ordered are proportionate to the estimated costs and the circumstances of the case.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Defendants to provide security for costs of the appeal in the sum of £450,000.
  • Defendants to pay £600,000 into court as a condition of permission to appeal, relating to specified past costs orders.