Greenov8 Global Platforms Ltd v Green [2022] EWHC 1669 (Ch) (09 June 2022)

Greenov8 Global Platforms Ltd v Green [2022] EWHC 1669 (Ch) (09 June 2022)

The court ordered security for costs because the claimant is a foreign, impecunious company, the gateways under CPR Part 25.13(2) are satisfied, and the claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence that an order would stifle its claim. The merits of the claim do not justify refusing security, and there is no adequate evidence that the claimant's impecuniosity was caused by the defendant.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1669 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Greenov8 Global Platforms Limited; Defendant: Jonathan Green
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (business and Property Courts) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Application for security for costs granted
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Jurisdiction, Impecuniosity, Stifling of Claims
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Security for Costs Fraudulent Misrepresentation Jurisdiction Impecuniosity Stifling of Claims

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

Greenov8 Global Platforms Limited

Claimant

Jonathan Green

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business and Property Courts) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered against an impecunious foreign claimant
  2. 2 Whether ordering security would stifle the claim
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's impecuniosity was caused by the defendant's alleged conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered security for costs because the claimant is a foreign, impecunious company, the gateways under CPR Part 25.13(2) are satisfied, and the claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence that an order would stifle its claim. The merits of the claim do not justify refusing security, and there is no adequate evidence that the claimant's impecuniosity was caused by the defendant.

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted

Orders

  • Claimant to provide security for the defendant's costs of the proceedings up to and including the exchange of witness statements.