Abbotswood Shipping Corporation v Air Pacific Ltd (Rev 1)

Abbotswood Shipping Corporation v Air Pacific Ltd (Rev 1)

The application for security for costs was dismissed because the claim and counterclaim substantially overlap, making it unjust to order security for costs against the claimant. The Crabtree principle applies, and no countervailing factors justify departure from it.

Parties
Claimant: Abbotswood Shipping Corporation; Defendant: Air Pacific Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Overlap of Claim and Counterclaim, Contracts (rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, Aircraft Lease Agreements

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

Parties

Abbotswood Shipping Corporation

Claimant

Air Pacific Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Application / Ruling on Application for Security for Costs

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should provide security for the defendant’s costs under CPR 25.12 and CPR 25.13(2)(a) and/or (c)
  2. 2 Whether the claim and counterclaim substantially overlap such that security for costs is unjust

Ratio Decidendi

The application for security for costs was dismissed because the claim and counterclaim substantially overlap, making it unjust to order security for costs against the claimant. The Crabtree principle applies, and no countervailing factors justify departure from it.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • Application for security for costs is dismissed
  • Costs to be dealt with by paper application unless agreed