Mahan Air & Anor v Blue Sky One Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 544 (11 May 2011)

Mahan Air & Anor v Blue Sky One Ltd & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 544 (11 May 2011)

The Court was not satisfied that the Mahan Parties had provided full and frank evidence of their financial position or that their appeals would be stifled by the imposition of security for costs or financial conditions. Orders for security for costs and conditions on appeal were appropriate given the Mahan Parties' contempt, failure to comply with court orders, and lack of enforceability of judgments in Iran.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 544
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Mahan Air; Appellant/defendant: Blue Sky Aviation Co FZE; Respondent/claimant: Blue Sky One Limited; Respondent/claimant: Blue Sky Two Limited; Respondent/claimant: Blue Sky Three Limited; Respondent/third Party: Balli Group PLC; Respondent/third Party: Crypton Limited; Respondent/third Party: Blue Sky Six Limited; Respondent/third Party: Blue Sky Four Limited; Respondent/third Party: Blue Sky Five Limited; Defendant/appellant: Blue Airways LLC; Claimant/respondent: PK Airfinance US Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Trial, Interlocutory Applications for Security for Costs and Conditions on Appeal
Outcome
Orders for security for costs and financial conditions imposed on Mahan Parties' appeals; partial stay of execution granted.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Stay of Execution, Contempt of Court, Aircraft Finance, Sanctions Compliance, Damages for Conversion, Set Off, Private International Law
Commercial Law Civil Procedure International Law Security for Costs Stay of Execution Contempt of Court Aircraft Finance Sanctions Compliance +3 more

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

Parties

Mahan Air

Appellant/defendant

Blue Sky Aviation Co FZE

Appellant/defendant

Blue Sky One Limited

Respondent/claimant

Blue Sky Two Limited

Respondent/claimant

Blue Sky Three Limited

Respondent/claimant

Balli Group PLC

Respondent/third Party

Crypton Limited

Respondent/third Party

Blue Sky Six Limited

Respondent/third Party

Blue Sky Four Limited

Respondent/third Party

Blue Sky Five Limited

Respondent/third Party

Blue Airways LLC

Defendant/appellant

PK Airfinance US Inc

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Trial, Interlocutory Applications for Security for Costs and Conditions on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs and financial conditions should be imposed on the Mahan Parties' appeals
  2. 2 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending appeal
  3. 3 Whether the Mahan Parties' appeals would be stifled by such orders

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was not satisfied that the Mahan Parties had provided full and frank evidence of their financial position or that their appeals would be stifled by the imposition of security for costs or financial conditions. Orders for security for costs and conditions on appeal were appropriate given the Mahan Parties' contempt, failure to comply with court orders, and lack of enforceability of judgments in Iran.

Court Disposition

Orders for security for costs and financial conditions imposed on Mahan Parties' appeals; partial stay of execution granted.

Orders

  • Mahan Parties' appeal against PK stayed unless £100,000 paid as security for costs within 21 days.
  • Mahan Parties' appeals against Balli Parties stayed unless £250,000 paid as security for costs within 21 days.