Craft Development SCI v Actis LLP (a firm) & Ors

Craft Development SCI v Actis LLP (a firm) & Ors

Craft failed to fully discharge the burden of proving that an order for security would stifle the claim due to gaps in evidence regarding funding sources and future litigation costs. However, the court found that the full amount sought by Actis would stifle the claim, so security was set at £300,000 as the maximum Craft could realistically raise without making compliance impossible.

Parties
Claimant: Craft Development SCI (suing by its provisional administrator Mr Ngoua Elembe Hiob); Defendant: Actis LLP; Defendant: Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3 aka Actis Africa Real Estate 3 LP; Defendant: Actis Africa Real Estate 3A LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3; Defendant: Actis Africa Real Estate 3 Co-Investment Scheme LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3; Defendant: Actis Africa Real Estate 3C LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3; Defendant: Actis GP LLP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted in part
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Impecuniosity, Joint Venture Disputes, Breach of Contract, Fraud, Unlawful Means Conspiracy
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Impecuniosity Joint Venture Disputes Breach of Contract Fraud Unlawful Means Conspiracy

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Craft Development SCI (suing by its provisional administrator Mr Ngoua Elembe Hiob)

Claimant

Actis LLP

Defendant

Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3 aka Actis Africa Real Estate 3 LP

Defendant

Actis Africa Real Estate 3A LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3

Defendant

Actis Africa Real Estate 3 Co-Investment Scheme LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3

Defendant

Actis Africa Real Estate 3C LP aka Actis Africa Real Estate Fund 3

Defendant

Actis GP LLP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against an impecunious claimant
  2. 2 Whether an order for security would stifle the claim
  3. 3 Appropriate quantum and manner of security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Craft failed to fully discharge the burden of proving that an order for security would stifle the claim due to gaps in evidence regarding funding sources and future litigation costs. However, the court found that the full amount sought by Actis would stifle the claim, so security was set at £300,000 as the maximum Craft could realistically raise without making compliance impossible.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted in part

Orders

  • Craft to provide security for costs in the sum of £300,000, payable in three staged payments aligned with expert evidence timetable.
  • Costs of the application to be in the case.