Geophysical Service Centre Co v Dowell Schlumberger (ME) Inc

Geophysical Service Centre Co v Dowell Schlumberger (ME) Inc

There is no evidence to support a submission that there is reason to believe the claimant will be unable to pay an adverse order for the defendant’s costs; the ATE policy provides sufficient security and any risk of avoidance or cancellation is merely theoretical.

Parties
Claimant: Geophysical Service Centre Co; Defendant: Dowell Schlumberger (ME) Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Application / Ruling on Security for Costs
Outcome
application for security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, ATE Insurance, Contractual Obligations, Litigation Funding
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Security for Costs ATE Insurance Contractual Obligations Litigation Funding

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Geophysical Service Centre Co

Claimant

Dowell Schlumberger (ME) Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application / Ruling on Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's ATE insurance policy provides sufficient security for costs to defeat the defendant's application for security for costs
  2. 2 Whether there is reason to believe the claimant will be unable to pay the defendant's costs if ordered to do so

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence to support a submission that there is reason to believe the claimant will be unable to pay an adverse order for the defendant’s costs; the ATE policy provides sufficient security and any risk of avoidance or cancellation is merely theoretical.

Court Disposition

application for security for costs dismissed