Pisante & Ors v Logothetis & Ors [2020] EWHC 3332 (Comm) (04 December 2020)

Pisante & Ors v Logothetis & Ors [2020] EWHC 3332 (Comm) (04 December 2020)

The court held that security for costs should be ordered against the Second to Fourth Claimants (corporate claimants resident outside Contracting States) because there is a real risk that assets within a Convention State may not be available for enforcement, and the claimants have not provided sufficient transparency or assurance regarding their assets and liabilities. The Nasser condition was satisfied. No order was made against the First Claimant, Mr Pisante, as he was found to be resident in Greece, a Contracting State.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 3332 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Victor Pisante; Claimant: Swindon Holdings & Finance Limited; Claimant: BCA Shipping Investment Corporation; Claimant: Castor Navigation Limited; Defendant: George Logothetis; Defendant: Lomar Corporation Limited; Defendant: Lomar Shipmanagement Limited; Defendant: Libra Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Jurisdiction, Enforcement of Judgments, Residence of Claimant, Corporate Claimants, CPR 25.13
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Jurisdiction Enforcement of Judgments Residence of Claimant Corporate Claimants CPR 25.13

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

Parties

Victor Pisante

Claimant

Swindon Holdings & Finance Limited

Claimant

BCA Shipping Investment Corporation

Claimant

Castor Navigation Limited

Claimant

George Logothetis

Defendant

Lomar Corporation Limited

Defendant

Lomar Shipmanagement Limited

Defendant

Libra Holdings Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should order security for costs against the claimants under CPR 25.13(2)(a) and/or (c)
  2. 2 Whether the claimants' residence and asset position justify such an order
  3. 3 Whether there are real risks or obstacles to enforcement justifying security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that security for costs should be ordered against the Second to Fourth Claimants (corporate claimants resident outside Contracting States) because there is a real risk that assets within a Convention State may not be available for enforcement, and the claimants have not provided sufficient transparency or assurance regarding their assets and liabilities. The Nasser condition was satisfied. No order was made against the First Claimant, Mr Pisante, as he was found to be resident in Greece, a Contracting State.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Security for costs ordered against the Second to Fourth Claimants in the sum of £805,000
  • No order for security for costs against the First Claimant, Mr Pisante