Frank & Anor v Chlorelle Construction Ltd [2010] EWHC 3233 (TCC) (19 November 2010)

The After the Event insurance policy offered is unclear and inadequate as security. There is no evidence that the creditors are unable to raise funds for security. Security for costs will not stifle the litigation; therefore, an order for security for costs is appropriate, but at a reduced sum of £100,000.

Citation: [2010] EWHC 3233 (TCC)
Parties: Applicant: Mrs Francesca Frank; Applicant: Mr Richard Frank; Respondent: Chlorelle Construction Ltd (in liquidation); Respondent: Respondent Architects
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 19 November 2010
Procedural Posture: Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome: Application for security for costs granted in part
Legal Topics: Security for Costs, Litigation Funding, After the Event Insurance, Conditional Fee Agreement, Liquidation

Civil Procedure Construction Law Security for Costs Litigation Funding After the Event Insurance Conditional Fee Agreement Liquidation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Mrs Francesca Frank

Applicant

Mr Richard Frank

Applicant

Chlorelle Construction Ltd (in liquidation)

Respondent

Respondent Architects

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs / Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether an order for security for costs would oppressively stifle the litigation
2 Adequacy of After the Event insurance as security
3 Ability of creditors to raise funds for security

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for security for costs granted in part

Orders

Applicants to provide security for costs in the sum of £100,000 within 12 weeks
Action stayed for 12 weeks pending payment of security