Danilina v Chernukhin & Ors [2018] EWHC 2503 (Comm) (02 October 2018)

Danilina v Chernukhin & Ors [2018] EWHC 2503 (Comm) (02 October 2018)

It is just to order further security for costs in the sums of £2,630,826 for the First and Second Defendants and £584,413 for the Third Defendant, reflecting 75% of their incurred and expected costs (less sums already paid), as there is a reasonable possibility of indemnity costs if the Claimant loses, and the Claimant has not discharged the burden of proving her claim would be stifled by such an order.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 2503 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Lolita Vladimirovna Danilina; First Defendant: Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin; Second Defendant: Navigator Equities Limited; Third Defendant: Vadim Kargin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Application for Further Security for Costs Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application granted in part; further security for costs ordered.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Costs Orders, Access to Justice, Indemnity Costs, Apportionment of Costs, Non Party Costs Orders
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Costs Orders Access to Justice Indemnity Costs Apportionment of Costs Non Party Costs 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lolita Vladimirovna Danilina

Claimant

Vladimir Anatolevich Chernukhin

First Defendant

Navigator Equities Limited

Second Defendant

Vadim Kargin

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Application for Further Security for Costs Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the just and fair amount of further security for costs to be ordered against the Claimant?
  2. 2 Is there a reasonable possibility that indemnity costs will be ordered if the Claimant loses?
  3. 3 Would an order for security in excess of £1.1 million stifle the Claimant's claim?

Ratio Decidendi

It is just to order further security for costs in the sums of £2,630,826 for the First and Second Defendants and £584,413 for the Third Defendant, reflecting 75% of their incurred and expected costs (less sums already paid), as there is a reasonable possibility of indemnity costs if the Claimant loses, and the Claimant has not discharged the burden of proving her claim would be stifled by such an order.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; further security for costs ordered.

Orders

  • Claimant to provide further security for costs: £2,630,826 to the First and Second Defendants and £584,413 to the Third Defendant.
  • £1.1 million to be provided within 14 days, balance within 14 days thereafter, apportioned between Defendants in proportion to their respective security entitlements.