Cody v Murray & Ors

Cody v Murray & Ors

Security for costs is justified in the sum of $30,000 due to the existence of exemptions under Texas law and the modest additional burden of enforcement, with no persuasive evidence that the Claimant's assets or insurance would render the order unnecessary or stifle the claim.

Parties
Claimant: David Cody; First Defendant: Andrew Murray; Second Defendant: Judy Murray; Third Defendant: William Murray
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Contractual Disputes

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Cody

Claimant

Andrew Murray

First Defendant

Judy Murray

Second Defendant

William Murray

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Security for Costs

  1. 1 Whether the defendants are entitled to an order for security for costs against a foreign resident claimant
  2. 2 Whether enforcement and execution obstacles in Texas justify security for costs
  3. 3 Whether exemptions under Texas law materially affect enforcement of an English costs order

Ratio Decidendi

Security for costs is justified in the sum of $30,000 due to the existence of exemptions under Texas law and the modest additional burden of enforcement, with no persuasive evidence that the Claimant's assets or insurance would render the order unnecessary or stifle the claim.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted.

Orders

  • Claimant to provide security of $30,000 by payment into court within 28 days.
  • Proceedings stayed until payment is made.